Long‐term efficacy and tolerability of tacrolimus 0.03% ointment in infants:* a two‐year open‐label study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Tacrolimus ointment is effective for treatment of moderate to severe atopic dermatitis (AD) in children aged ≥2 years (Br J Dermatol, 2004; 150: 554). Here, efficacy and tolerability of tacrolimus 0.03% ointment were evaluated in 50 infants aged <2 years at start of treatment. METHODS: Infants with AD previously enrolled in a tacrolimus ointment pharmacokinetics trial were eligible for a 24-month open-label phase II study. Tacrolimus 0.03% ointment was applied to affected areas until clearance. In cases of exacerbation or clinical worsening, patients restarted treatment. RESULTS: Mean ± SD Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) score improved, from 11.2 ± 10.5 baseline to 2.6 ± 4.1 at endpoint (24 months); mean affected body surface area decreased from 25.2 ± 21.1% to 5.1 ± 9.0%, with improvement on all items of the Physicians' Assessment of Individual Signs. The Physicians' Global Evaluation of Clinical Response showed a result of "cleared"/"excellent" for 63.3% of patients; 85.7% of parents/guardians assessed symptoms as "much better." Treatment was well tolerated, with common, nonserious respiratory infections and gastroenteritis the most frequently reported adverse events. The most common application-site events were infections and pruritus. Over 98% of blood samples showed tacrolimus concentrations <1.0 ng/ml; >40% showed concentrations below the lower limit of quantification (0.0250 ng/ml). CONCLUSIONS: Over a period of two years, tacrolimus 0.03% ointment was associated with substantial clinical improvement of AD in infants aged <2 years. Treatment tolerability was similar to that seen in older 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 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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".