Novel Composite Efficacy Measure To Demonstrate the Rationale and Efficacy of Combination Antiviral–Anti-Inflammatory Treatment for Recurrent Herpes Simplex Labialis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Historically, the primary target for research and treatment of recurrent herpes simplex labialis (HSL) has been limited to inhibiting herpes simplex virus (HSV) replication. Antiviral monotherapy, however, has proven only marginally effective in curtailing the duration and severity of recurrent lesions. Recently, the role of inflammation in the progression and resolution of recurrences has been identified as an additional target. This was evaluated in a randomized study comparing combination topical 5% acyclovir-1% hydrocortisone cream (AHC) with 5% acyclovir alone (AC; in the AHC vehicle) and the vehicle. The efficacy of each topical therapy was evaluated for cumulative lesion size--a novel composite efficacy endpoint incorporating episode duration, lesion area, and proportion of nonulcerative lesions. In that study, cumulative lesion area was significantly decreased with AHC compared with AC (25% decrease; P<0.05) and the vehicle (50% decrease; P<0.0001). As research continues in this arena, cumulative lesion area should be included as a measure of efficacy in clinical trials of recurrent HSL therapies.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".