MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2980603063 · doi:10.1111/bjd.18623

Secukinumab for patients failing previous tumour necrosis factor‐α inhibitor therapy: results of a randomized open‐label study (SIGNATURE)

2019· article· en· W2980603063 on OpenAlexaff
Richard B. Warren, Johnathan Barker, A.Y. Finlay, A. David Burden, Brian Kirby, Y. Armendáriz, R Williams, C. Hatchard, Swarna Khare, C.E.M. Griffiths

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Dermatology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicPsoriasis: Treatment and Pathogenesis
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Infection and Immunity
FundersNovartis Pharmaceuticals UK Limited
KeywordsSecukinumabMedicineRandomized controlled trialOncologyOpen labelTumor necrosis factor alphaSignature (topology)Internal medicineNecrosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Efficacy data on therapies for patients with psoriasis who have failed tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-α inhibitor therapy is limited. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness and tolerability of secukinumab, an interleukin (IL)-17A inhibitor, in patients with moderate/severe chronic plaque psoriasis with documented efficacy failure of TNF-α inhibitor therapy (SIGNATURE study). METHODS: This was a randomized, open-label, noncomparator study in 53 dermatology centres in the U.K. and Republic of Ireland. Patients were randomized 1 : 1 to receive secukinumab 300 mg or 150 mg subcutaneously every week for 4 weeks, then 4-weekly thereafter. Patients were stratified by their prior efficacy failure with TNF-α inhibitors. Only patients who started and stayed on the same dose at each time point were included for efficacy assessments. RESULTS: In total, 233 patients were analysed. The primary end point was met, with a statistically significant improvement in response rates [75% reduction in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 75)] from baseline to week 16 in both secukinumab 300 mg and 150 mg dose groups [77 of 118 patients (65·3%) and 51 of 115 patients (44·3%), respectively; P < 0·0001]. After 72 weeks, in patients starting and remaining on 300 mg, 77% (54 of 70) achieved PASI 75. Improvements in Dermatology Life Quality Index from baseline to week 16 occurred and were maintained up to 72 weeks. The safety profile was generally consistent with previous secukinumab studies, although a higher incidence of some adverse events (e.g. candida infections) was observed. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence of efficacy and safety of secukinumab for treatment of patients with psoriasis who failed prior TNF-α inhibitor therapy. This study represents a 'real-world' population, providing reassurance that secukinumab is a treatment option in this difficult-to-treat population. What's already known about this topic? Conventional systemic nonbiological and tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-α inhibitor therapies for plaque psoriasis have not fully met patients' needs. There is a lack of data to support the treatment pathways for patients with psoriasis who have inadequate responses to TNF-α inhibitor therapy. Secukinumab, a recombinant high-affinity fully human monoclonal anti-human interleukin-17A antibody of the IgG1/κ-class, has shown excellent safety and efficacy in the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis. What does this study add? This is the first study evaluating treatment with biologics after prior efficacy failure of TNF-α inhibitor therapy as defined by the U.K. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence criteria. Secukinumab is an effective treatment in this difficult-to-treat patient population. This study provides important practical information for clinicians managing psoriasis. Adverse events were consistent with the phase III programme for secukinumab, although some adverse events, e.g. candida, were increased.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.246 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
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

Citations27
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of DermatologySame topicPsoriasis: Treatment and PathogenesisFrench-language works237,207