MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2902260894 · doi:10.1111/bjd.17462

Use of an alternative method to evaluate erythema severity in a clinical trial: difference in vehicle response with evaluation of baseline and postdose photographs for effect of oxymetazoline cream 1·0% for persistent erythema of rosacea in a phase IV study

2018· article· en· W2902260894 on OpenAlexaff
Lawrence F. Eichenfield, J.Q. Del Rosso, Jerry Tan, Adelaide A. Hebert, Guy Webster, Julie Harper, Hilary Baldwin, Leon Kircik, Linda Stein‐Gold, Alexandre Kaoukhov, Nancy Alvandi

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Dermatology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcne and Rosacea Treatments and Effects
Canadian institutionsWindsor Clinical Research
FundersAllergan
KeywordsErythemaOxymetazolineMedicineRosaceaClinical trialRandomized controlled trialDermatologySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Once-daily topical oxymetazoline cream 1·0% significantly reduced persistent facial erythema of rosacea in trials requiring live, static patient assessments. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate critically the methodology of clinical trials that require live, static patient assessments by determining whether assessment of erythema is different when reference to the baseline photograph is allowed. METHODS: In two identically designed, randomized, phase III trials, adults with persistent facial erythema of rosacea applied oxymetazoline or vehicle once daily. This phase IV study evaluated standardized digital facial photographs from the phase III trials to record ≥ 1-grade Clinician Erythema Assessment (CEA) improvement at 1, 3, 6, 9 and 12 h postdose. RESULTS: Among 835 patients (oxymetazoline n = 415, vehicle n = 420), significantly greater proportions of patients treated with oxymetazoline vs. vehicle achieved ≥ 1-grade CEA improvement. For the comparison between phase IV study results and the original phase III analysis, when reference to baseline photographs was allowed while evaluating post-treatment photographs, the results for oxymetazoline were similar to results of the phase III trials (up to 85.7%), but a significantly lower proportion of vehicle recipients achieved ≥ 1-grade CEA improvement (up to 29.7% [phase 4] vs. 52.3% [phase 3]; P<0.001). In the phase IV study, up to 80·2% of patients treated with oxymetazoline achieved at least moderate erythema improvement vs. up to 22·9% of patients treated with vehicle. The association between patients' satisfaction with facial skin redness and percentage of erythema improvement was statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Assessment of study photographs, with comparison to baseline, confirmed significant erythema reduction with oxymetazoline on the first day of application. Compared with the phase III trial results, significantly fewer vehicle recipients attained ≥ 1-grade CEA improvement, suggesting a mitigated vehicle effect. This methodology may improve the accuracy of clinical trials evaluating erythema severity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.981
Threshold uncertainty score0.100

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.100
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.353 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designObservational
DomainMethods
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of DermatologySame topicAcne and Rosacea Treatments and EffectsFrench-language works237,207