CLinical Experience Acquired with Raptiva<sup>®</sup> (CLEAR) trial in patients with moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis: results from extended treatment in an international, Phase III, placebo‐controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The 12-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, first-treatment (FT) CLEAR trial period demonstrated the efficacy/safety of efalizumab in moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis, including refractory or contraindicated patients unsuitable for other systemic treatments. This study assessed the efficacy/safety of open-label extended treatment (up to 24 weeks' continuous treatment) in patients not achieving > or =75% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI-75) at week 12 of the FT period. Time to relapse after treatment cessation, and efficacy/safety of 12 weeks' open-label re-treatment in patients achieving PASI-75 at week 12 FT were also assessed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with PASI-75 at week 12 FT were observed without treatment until relapse, then re-treated with open-label efalizumab (1.0 mg/kg/week for 12 weeks). Others received open-label extended treatment without intervening observation. RESULTS: Among efalizumab-treated patients (n = 308) who had < 75% PASI improvement at week 12 FT, extended treatment led to PASI-75 in 26.6%. Among patients with between > or = 50 and < 75% PASI improvement at week 12 FT (n = 118), 47.5% improved to PASI-75 with extended treatment. For patients achieving PASI-75 at week 12 FT (n = 164), median time to relapse was 58 days. Re-treatment after relapse led to mean PASI improvement of 62.3% from study baseline (n = 145). Safety results were consistent with previous studies, with no new safety concerns. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate additional benefit of continuing efalizumab. Re-treatment re-established disease control in patients with PASI-75 who relapsed following treatment cessation. The safety profile remained consistent with that seen at 12 weeks.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".