Efficacy and safety of topical WBI-1001 in patients with mild to severe atopic dermatitis: results from a 12-week, multicentre, randomized, placebo-controlled double-blind trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is a need for the development of novel nonsteroidal topical drugs for the treatment of atopic dermatitis (AD). OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to evaluate the efficacy of WBI-1001 over 6 weeks of treatment of mild to severe AD. METHODS: Patients with AD affecting 3-20% of their body surface area and with an Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) of 2-4 were randomized (1 : 1 : 1) to receive placebo, WBI-1001 0·5% or WBI-1001 1·0% in a cream formulation applied twice daily for 6 weeks. At the end of this phase, patients receiving WBI-1001 continued the same treatment for an additional 6 weeks. Patients receiving placebo entered into a 6-week double-blind phase with re-randomization (1 : 1) to WBI-1001 0·5% or 1·0% cream. The primary objective was to evaluate the efficacy of WBI-1001 over 6 weeks of treatment of mild to severe AD. The primary endpoint was the mean change from baseline in IGA at day 42 (week 6). RESULTS: In total, 148 patients were randomized and analysed in the placebo (51), WBI-1001 0·5% (50) and WBI-1001 1·0% (47) groups. There was a decrease of 1·3 [43%; P < 0·001; 95% confidence interval (CI) -1·2 to -0·5] and 1·8 (56·3%; P < 0·001; 95% CI -1·6 to -0·9) in IGA at day 42 in the WBI-1001 0·5% and 1·0% groups, respectively, as compared with a decrease of 0·5 (14·7%) in the placebo group. Adverse drug reactions included a few cases of folliculitis and contact dermatitis. CONCLUSIONS: WBI-1001 is an efficacious novel topical anti-inflammatory molecule for the treatment of AD.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".