Dupilumab shows long-term safety and efficacy in patients with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis enrolled in a phase 3 open-label extension study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Significant unmet need exists for long-term treatment of moderate to severe atopic dermatitis (AD). OBJECTIVE: To assess the long-term safety and efficacy of dupilumab in patients with AD. METHODS: This ongoing, multicenter, open-label extension study (NCT01949311) evaluated long-term dupilumab treatment in adults who had previously participated in phase 1 through 3 clinical trials of dupilumab for AD. This analysis examined patients given 300 mg dupilumab weekly for up to 76 weeks at data cutoff (April 2016). Safety was the primary outcome; efficacy was also evaluated. RESULTS: Of 1491 enrolled patients (1042.9 patient-years), 92.9% were receiving treatment at cutoff. The safety profile was consistent with previously reported trials (420.4 adverse events/100 patient-years and 8.5 serious adverse events/100 patient-years), with no new safety signals; common adverse events included nasopharyngitis, conjunctivitis, and injection-site reactions. Sustained improvement was seen up to 76 weeks in all efficacy outcomes, including measures of skin inflammation, pruritus, and quality of life. LIMITATIONS: Lack of control arm, limited number of patients with 76 weeks or longer of treatment (median follow-up, 24 weeks), and patients not receiving the approved dose regimen of 300 mg every 2 weeks. CONCLUSION: The safety and efficacy profile from this study supports the role of dupilumab as continuous long-term treatment for patients with moderate to severe AD.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it