MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2697574135 · doi:10.1111/bjd.15750

Efficacy and safety of guselkumab in patients with psoriasis who have an inadequate response to ustekinumab: results of the randomized, double‐blind, phase <scp>III NAVIGATE</scp> trial

2017· article· en· W2697574135 on OpenAlex
Richard G. Langley, Tsen‐Fang Tsai, Susan Flavin, Michael Song, B. Randazzo, Yasmine Wasfi, Jingzhi Jiang, S. Li, L. Puig

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

VenueBritish Journal of Dermatology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicPsoriasis: Treatment and Pathogenesis
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersJanssen Research and Development
KeywordsUstekinumabMedicinePsoriasisDouble blindDermatologyRandomized controlled trialRandomizationInternal medicineAlternative medicineDiseasePathologyPlacebo

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Guselkumab, an anti-interleukin-23 monoclonal antibody, has demonstrated significant efficacy in phase III psoriasis trials. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of guselkumab in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis who had an inadequate response to ustekinumab. METHODS: In this phase III, randomized, double-blind study, 871 patients received open-label ustekinumab (45 mg or 90 mg) at weeks 0 and 4. At week 16, 268 patients with an inadequate response to ustekinumab [Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) ≥ 2] were randomized (double-blind) to guselkumab 100 mg or to continue ustekinumab; 585 of 871 patients (67%) with IGA 0/1 at week 16 continued open-label ustekinumab. The primary end point was the number of visits at which randomized patients achieved IGA 0/1 and at least a two-grade improvement (from week 16) from week 28 to week 40. Improvement ≥ 90% or 100% in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 90/100) and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) of 0/1 were also assessed. RESULTS: The mean number of visits at which patients achieved IGA 0/1 and at least a two-grade improvemen (week 28-40) was significantly greater in the guselkumab group vs. the randomized ustekinumab group (1·5 vs. 0·7; P < 0·001); greater proportions of patients in the guselkumab group achieved IGA 0/1 and at least a two-grade improvement at week 28 (31·1% vs. 14·3%; P = 0·001) and week 52 (36·3% vs. 17·3%; P < 0·001). Greater proportions of patients treated with guselkumab achieved PASI 90, PASI 100 and DLQI 0/1 at week 52. After week 16, 64·4% of patients in the guselkumab group and 55·6% in the ustekinumab group had at least one adverse event (AE); infections were the most frequent AE type. Overall, 6·7% (n = 9) of patients in the guselkumab group had at least one serious AE compared with 4·5% (n = 6) for the ustekinumab group. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with ustekinumab who did not achieve an IGA of 0/1 by week 16 derived significant benefit from switching to guselkumab.

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)0.002
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 score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.769

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.257 · 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