Risankizumab vs. ustekinumab for plaque psoriasis: a critical appraisal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Gordon et al. investigated the efficacy and safety of risankizumab [an anti-interleukin (IL)-23p19 biologic] compared with ustekinumab (anti-IL-12/23p40) and placebo in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis. This was a parallel-group controlled study up to 16 weeks with a planned switch of the placebo group to risankizumab at 16 weeks. SETTING AND DESIGN: This study consisted of two replicate phase III, double-blinded randomized controlled trials (UltIMMa-1 and UltIMMa-2) conducted across 139 centres in Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Japan, Mexico, Poland, Portugal, South Korea, Spain and the U.S.A. STUDY EXPOSURE: Patients with a minimum 6-month history of chronic plaque psoriasis were randomly assigned to receive either 150 mg risankizumab, 45 mg or 90 mg ustekinumab or placebo. Prior to this, each group was also stratified by weight (either more than or less than 100 kg) and previous exposure to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors. Those assigned to receive placebo were transitioned onto risankizumab at week 16. The study drugs were given at weeks 0, 4, 16, 28 and 40. OUTCOMES: The severity of psoriasis was measured using the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) and a static Physician's Global Assessment (sPGA). The authors additionally recorded the number of adverse events in each treatment arm, and a measure of quality of life. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The coprimary outcomes were the proportions of patients achieving ≥ 90% reduction in their baseline PASI (PASI 90) and an sPGA score of 0 or 1 (clear or almost clear) at week 16. RESULTS: In total 506 patients were included in UltIMMa-1 and 491 patients in UltIMMa-2. In UltIMMa-1, PASI 90 by week 16 was achieved by 75·3% of patients receiving risankizumab, compared with 42·0% receiving ustekinumab and 4·9% receiving placebo (P < 0·001 vs. placebo and ustekinumab). sPGA of 0 or 1 by week 16 was achieved by 87·6% of patients receiving risankizumab, compared with 63·0% receiving ustekinumab and 7·8% receiving placebo (P < 0·001 vs. placebo and ustekinumab). The results for UltIMMa-2 are similar. The frequencies of adverse events in the risankizumab, ustekinumab and placebo groups were similar in both studies. CONCLUSIONS: Gordon et al. conclude that risankizumab has a higher efficacy than placebo and ustekinumab in the treatment of moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis, and that the adverse-event profiles were similar across all treatment groups.
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 | 0.026 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".