MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120892346 · doi:10.1542/peds.2014-1990

Safety and Efficacy of Pimecrolimus in Atopic Dermatitis: A 5-Year Randomized Trial

2015· article· en· W2120892346 on OpenAlexaff
Bárður Sigurgeirsson, Andrzej Boznański, Gail Todd, André Vertruyen, Marie L. A. Schuttelaar, Xuejun Zhu, Suzanne Schuh, Paul Y. Qaqundah, Yves Poulin, Sigurður Kristjánsson, Andrea von Berg, Antonio Nieto, Mark Boguniewicz, Amy S. Paller, Rada Dakovic, Johannes Ring, Thomas A. Luger

Bibliographic record

VenuePEDIATRICS · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatology and Skin Diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCentre de Recherche Dermatologique du Québec MétropolitainHôtel-Dieu de Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePimecrolimusAtopic dermatitisAdverse effectRandomized controlled trialPediatricsTacrolimusInternal medicineDermatologyTransplantation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Atopic dermatitis (AD) primarily affects infants and young children. Although topical corticosteroids (TCSs) are often prescribed, noncorticosteroid treatments are needed because compliance with TCSs is poor due to concerns about their side effects. In this longest and largest intervention study ever conducted in infants with mild-to-moderate AD, pimecrolimus 1% cream (PIM) was compared with TCSs. METHODS: A total of 2418 infants were enrolled in this 5-year open-label study. Infants were randomized to PIM (n = 1205; with short-term TCSs for disease flares) or TCSs (n = 1213). The primary objective was to compare safety; the secondary objective was to document PIM's long-term efficacy. Treatment success was defined as an Investigator's Global Assessment score of 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear). RESULTS: Both PIM and TCSs had a rapid onset of action with >50% of patients achieving treatment success by week 3. After 5 years, >85% and 95% of patients in each group achieved overall and facial treatment success, respectively. The PIM group required substantially fewer steroid days than the TCS group (7 vs 178). The profile and frequency of adverse events was similar in the 2 groups; in both groups, there was no evidence for impairment of humoral or cellular immunity. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term management of mild-to-moderate AD in infants with PIM or TCSs was safe without any effect on the immune system. PIM was steroid-sparing. The data suggest PIM had similar efficacy to TCS and support the use of PIM as a first-line treatment of mild-to-moderate AD in infants and children.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.174
Threshold uncertainty score0.264

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.261 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations147
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePEDIATRICSSame topicDermatology and Skin DiseasesFrench-language works237,207