Systematic review of the real‐world evidence of adalimumab safety in psoriasis registries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Long-term safety of adalimumab in psoriasis clinical studies has been established. The objective of this research was to review real-world evidence of adalimumab safety from registries of adult patients with psoriasis treated in clinical practice. Databases (BIOSIS Previews, Current Contents Search, Derwent Drug File, EMBASE, EMBASE Alert, EMCare, MEDLINE, SciSearch) were searched for psoriasis registries with adalimumab safety data. Eligible papers were English language manuscripts (conference abstracts excluded) from psoriasis registries presenting safety data for adult patients with psoriasis receiving adalimumab. The incidence and rate (events/100 patient-years [PY]) of adverse events (AEs), serious AEs (SAEs) and AEs of special interest are reported. Abstracts of 425 publications were screened, and 401 publications excluded (208 conference abstracts; 193 papers). Remaining manuscripts were fully screened; 14 were excluded (no adalimumab data, n = 10; no safety data, n = 2; no on-treatment data, n = 1; not English, n = 1), and 10 selected. Overall rates of AEs (4273 [22.2/100PY]) and SAEs (827 [4.3/100PY]) were reported in the ESPRIT registry (N = 6059). Rates of infections (7.7-14.7/100PY) and serious infections (<0.6-2.0/100PY) were reported in four studies. Cardiovascular-related events were reported in three studies: ≤0.1/100PY per major cardiac event in ESPRIT, <0.5/100PY major cardiac events in PsoBest and serious cardiovascular events in two patients (<1%) in DERMBIO. Malignancies were reported in three studies (any malignancy, 0.9/100PY; malignancies excluding non-melanoma skin cancer [NMSC], <0.6/100PY; NMSC, 0.6-<0.5/100PY). These findings suggest that real-world safety of adalimumab is consistent across different psoriasis registries, which supports the existing long-term safety profile of adalimumab from clinical studies.
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 | 0.037 | 0.138 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.017 | 0.016 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".