Systematic Review on the Efficacy, Safety, and Cost-Effectiveness of Topical Calcineurin Inhibitors in Atopic Dermatitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Topical calcineurin inhibitors (TCIs) are widely used as an alternative to topical corticosteroids (TCSs) in treating of atopic dermatitis, but their risk versus benefit compared with TCSs remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: We performed a systematic review of the efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of TCI compared with TCS and emollients. METHODS: Published meta-analysis, systematic reviews, and individual studies from January 2005 to January 2015 on the comparative efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of TCI against emollients and TCS were included. RESULTS: Tacrolimus is comparable to TCS in efficacy, safety profile, and cost-effectiveness. Pimecrolimus has a similar safety profile compared with TCS, emollients, and tacrolimus. It is superior to emollients but inferior to TCS and tacrolimus in efficacy and cost-effectiveness. The association of tacrolimus with malignancy remains uncertain. CONCLUSIONS: Tacrolimus is an efficacious and cost-effective alternative to TCS, but its benefits need to be weighed against its still uncertain risk for malignancy. Pimecrolimus is appropriate for mild atopic dermatitis when TCS or tacrolimus is unsuitable.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".