Duration of remission of biologic agents for chronic plaque psoriasis.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The efficacy of biologic agents to treat psoriasis has been established in well-designed clinical trials. The primary endpoint is usually a 75% reduction from the baseline Psoriasis Area and Severity Index, stressing acute control of symptoms. Another important endpoint is remission, or duration of response off therapy, which reduces exposure to immunosuppressive agents and potentially lowers costs. METHODS: We searched the literature for randomized controlled clinical trials of remission with biologic agents. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Among approved biologic agents, alefacept produced the longest posttreatment clinical benefits in responders (7 to 8.6 months after a 12-week course), followed by infliximab (4.7 months after a 6-week, 3-dose induction period), etanercept (2.8 to 3.5 months after 12 weeks of therapy), and efalizumab (2.8 months after 24 weeks of therapy). Long-term response to infliximab in some patients may be limited by neutralizing antibodies. Additional data on adalimumab are needed.
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".