MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2593211227 · doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2016.12.014

Clinical similarity of biosimilar ABP 501 to adalimumab in the treatment of patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis: A randomized, double-blind, multicenter, phase III study

2017· article· en· W2593211227 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Academy of Dermatology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicBiosimilars and Bioanalytical Methods
Canadian institutionsSKiN HealthProbity Medical Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdalimumabMedicinePsoriasis Area and Severity IndexClinical endpointConfidence intervalPsoriasisInternal medicineAdverse effectRandomized controlled trialBiosimilarSurgeryDermatologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: ABP 501 is a biosimilar of adalimumab. OBJECTIVE: We sought to compare the efficacy and safety of ABP 501 with adalimumab. METHODS: This 52-week, double-blind study randomized patients with moderate to severe psoriasis to ABP 501 or adalimumab. At week 16, those with 50% or more improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score from baseline on ABP 501 continued the same treatment, whereas adalimumab-treated patients were rerandomized to adalimumab or ABP 501. Clinical similarity in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index percent improvement from baseline to week 16 (primary end point) was established if the point estimate of treatment difference and its 2-sided 95% confidence interval between groups was within equivalence margin of ±15. Patients, including those undergoing a single transition at week 16, were evaluated for safety and immunogenicity. RESULTS: Psoriasis Area and Severity Index percent improvement at week 16 was 80.9 for ABP 501 and 83.1 for adalimumab (least-square mean difference -2.18 [95% confidence interval -7.39 to 3.02]). Adverse events (67.2% [117/174] vs 63.6% [110/173]) and antidrug antibody incidence (55.2% [96/174] vs 63.6% [110/173]) for ABP 501 vs adalimumab were similar. Safety, including immunogenicity, was similar among groups after single transition (week 20). LIMITATIONS: The 52-week data are not reported here. CONCLUSIONS: ABP 501 was shown to be clinically similar to adalimumab. Safety and immunogenicity were not impacted immediately after single transition (adalimumab to ABP 501).

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.546

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.058
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.348 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it