Adalimumab medium-term dosing strategy in moderate-to-severe hidradenitis suppurativa: integrated results from the phase III randomized placebo-controlled PIONEER trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Background Weekly adalimumab (Humira®) is approved for the treatment of hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) based on the 12-week placebo-controlled periods of the two phase III PIONEER trials. Objectives Using PIONEER integrated trial results, we aimed to evaluate the optimal medium-term adalimumab maintenance dosing strategy for moderate-to-severe HS. Methods Each trial had two double-blind periods; 12-week Period A and 24-week Period B. Patients randomized to adalimumab 40 mg every week (ADAew) (Period A), were rerandomized in Period B to ADAew (ADAew/ew), ADA every other week (ADAew/eow), or placebo (ADAew/pbo). Placebo-randomized patients were reassigned in Period B to ADAew (PIONEER I) or placebo (PIONEER II). The primary outcome was HS Clinical Response (HiSCR). Patients who lost response during Period B were discontinued from the study and offered an option to enter the open-label extension (OLE) to receive ADAew. Results are reported across the two study periods, and data were combined from the two study periods and the OLE. Results For week-12 HiSCR achievers, the HiSCR week-36 rate was 48·1% (ADAew/ew) vs. 46·2% (ADAew/eow) and 32·1% (ADAew/pbo). Combining (post hoc) these patients with week-12 partial responders further differentiated outcomes in Period B (ADAew/ew 55·7% vs. ADAew/eow 40·0% and ADAew/pbo 30·1%). Period-B adverse-event rates were ADAew/ew 59·6% vs. ADAew/eow 57·4% and ADAew/pbo 65·0%. One patient (ADAew/ew) reported a serious infection. Conclusions Weekly adalimumab treatment, effective throughout 36 weeks, was the optimal maintenance medium-term dosing regimen for this population. At least partial response after 12 weeks with continued weekly dosing had better outcomes than dose reduction or interruption. Patients who do not show at least a partial response to weekly adalimumab by week 12 are unlikely to benefit from continued therapy. No new safety risks were identified. What's already known about this topic? Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a chronic inflammatory disease, commonly misinterpreted as an infection and treated with long-term antibiotic regimens or surgical incisions. Based on the chronicity of HS and the lack of evidence for efficacious and safe long-term HS treatments, it is important to evaluate medium- to long-term therapies for HS. Weekly adalimumab (Humira®) is approved for the treatment of moderate-to-severe HS based on the two phase III PIONEER trials. What does this study add? This study pooled data from the two PIONEER trials, providing a more robust assessment of outcomes. After at least partial treatment success with weekly adalimumab short-term therapy (12 weeks), continuing weekly dosing during the subsequent 24 weeks had better outcomes than dose reduction or treatment interruption. Patients who do not show at least a partial response to weekly adalimumab by week 12 are unlikely to benefit from continued therapy.
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 | 0.021 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".