Long-term efficacy of up to 15 months’ efalizumab therapy in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The efficacy and safety of efalizumab in the treatment of moderate-to-severe chronic psoriasis has been established in studies of up to 3 years' duration. This study aims to describe the efficacy of up to 15 months' treatment with efalizumab and the convenience of therapy in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis. Patients who had completed a 3-month, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, Phase IIIb trial entered a 12-month extension study and received efalizumab, 1 mg/kg/week administered subcutaneously, for up to 12 months. Of 450 patients originally randomly assigned to receive efalizumab, 40.9% achieved a reduction of > or = 75% in the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score after 15 months of treatment. Improvements were also observed on the frequency and severity subscales of the Psoriasis Symptom Assessment. The majority of patients reported that efalizumab treatment was more or much more convenient than other psoriasis treatments. Efalizumab, 1 mg/kg/week, provides long-term efficacy and good convenience with up to 15 months of continuous treatment.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it