Recommendations for the Long-Term Treatment of Psoriasis with Infliximab: A Dermatology Expert Group Consensus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Infliximab has been approved for the treatment of chronic plaque psoriasis for only a few years. As physicians gain confidence in initiating and maintaining this therapy, guidance on the management of patients beyond several months or years is needed. To date, there is little or no information about the long-term management in clinical trials or guidelines. METHODS: Here we report on the key aspects related to the use of infliximab for the treatment of psoriasis. The data presented here were derived using a modified Delphi survey to obtain a consensus opinion of 11 dermatologists from Europe and Canada experienced in long-term therapy with infliximab. RESULTS/CONCLUSION: The Delphi participants reviewed several important topics related to biological therapy and infliximab. This paper is not intended to provide a recommendation on all practical aspects related to biological therapy; it has rather been written to provide useful and practical information on the 'best practice' use of infliximab.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".