CLinical experience acquired with the efalizumab (Raptiva<sup>®</sup>) (CLEAR) trial in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis: results from a phase III international randomized, placebo-controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Efalizumab (anti-CD11a), a humanized monoclonal antibody, blocks multiple T-cell-dependent functions implicated in the pathogenesis of psoriasis, including T-cell activation, migration to the skin, reactivation in psoriatic skin and interactions with keratinocytes. OBJECTIVES: This multinational, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial was designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of subcutaneous efalizumab 1.0 mg kg-1 once weekly for 12 weeks compared with placebo in a population that included high-need patients, defined as those for whom at least two systemic therapies were unsuitable because of lack of efficacy, intolerance or contraindication. PATIENTS/METHODS: Patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis [involvement of >or=10% of total body surface area and Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI)>or=12.0 at screening] were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive efalizumab or placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving >or=75% PASI improvement (PASI-75 response) at week 12 in the intention-to-treat population; secondary endpoints included changes in PASI, static Physician's Global Assessment, Physician's Global Assessment of change from baseline and percentage of body surface area affected. Results We enrolled 793 patients (529 received efalizumab and 264 placebo), including 526 high-need patients (342 received efalizumab and 184 placebo). Week 12 PASI-75 rates were 29.5% for efalizumab compared with 2.7% for placebo among high-need patients (P<0.0001) and 31.4% for efalizumab compared with 4.2% for placebo in the full study population (P<0.0001). RESULTS: for all secondary efficacy endpoints showed superiority of efalizumab over placebo in both the high-need and the full populations. Efalizumab demonstrated a favourable safety profile, without evidence of systemic toxicity, in both the high-need group and the overall study population. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy and safety of efalizumab therapy were comparable between high-need patients and the more general moderate-to-severe psoriasis patient population. In view of its demonstrated efficacy and safety profile, efalizumab represents a valuable option for the treatment of adult patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis, including high-need patients.
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 | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".