Patient‐reported symptoms and signs of moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis treated with guselkumab or adalimumab: results from the randomized <scp>VOYAGE</scp> 1 trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: How patients experience the symptoms/signs of psoriasis is highly relevant for assessing treatment response. OBJECTIVES: Compare outcomes with guselkumab, placebo and adalimumab utilizing the novel, validated Psoriasis Symptoms and Signs Diary (PSSD). METHODS: VOYAGE 1 is an ongoing, phase III, double-blinded, controlled trial of patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis. Patients were randomized to guselkumab 100 mg every 8 weeks; placebo-to-guselkumab 100 mg every 8 weeks; or adalimumab 40 mg every 2 weeks. The PSSD was self-administered to assess symptoms (i.e. itch, skin tightness, burning, stinging and pain) and signs (i.e. dryness, cracking, scaling, shedding/flaking, redness and bleeding) of psoriasis (0-10 [absent-to-worst-imaginable]) every 24 h. Symptom and sign summary scores were derived (0-100) based on average scores of the individual symptoms and signs. Proportions of patients with clinically meaningful improvements and symptom- and sign-free scores of 0 were evaluated across treatment groups at weeks 16, 24 and 48. RESULTS: At baseline, 652 of 837 randomized patients had PSSD scores. The proportion of patients achieving clinically meaningful improvements in PSSD summary scores was significantly higher in the guselkumab group compared with the placebo group at week 16 (P < 0.001) and compared with the adalimumab group at weeks 24 (P = 0.002) and 48 (P < 0.001). The proportions of patients achieving PSSD symptom and sign summary scores of 0 (i.e. symptom- and sign-free) were significantly higher for guselkumab vs. placebo at week 16 and vs. adalimumab at weeks 24 and 48 (all P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Based on PSSD scores, greater improvements in symptoms and signs of psoriasis were reported by patients treated with guselkumab compared with placebo at week 16 or adalimumab through 48 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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".