Long-term safety and efficacy of etanercept in children and adolescents with plaque psoriasis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There are no systemic therapies approved in the United States to treat pediatric psoriasis. OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate long-term safety and efficacy of etanercept in children and adolescents with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. METHODS: This 5-year, open-label extension study enrolled patients aged 4 to 17 years who had participated in a 48-week parent study. End points included occurrence of adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs including infections, and rates of 75% and 90% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score and clear/almost clear on static physician global assessment. RESULTS: Of 182 patients enrolled, 181 received etanercept and 69 completed 264 weeks. Through week 264, 161 (89.0%) patients reported an AE, most commonly upper respiratory tract infection (37.6%), nasopharyngitis (26.0%), and headache (21.5%). Seven patients reported 8 serious AEs; only 1 (cellulitis) was considered treatment-related. No cases of opportunistic infections or malignancy were reported. Rates of 75% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score (∼ 60%-70%) and 90% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score (∼ 30%-40%) and static physician global assessment status clear/almost clear (∼ 40%-50%) were maintained through week 264. LIMITATIONS: The number of patients remaining on study at week 264 was small. CONCLUSION: Etanercept in pediatric patients was generally well tolerated and efficacy was maintained in those who remained in the study for up to 264 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".