Efficacy of tildrakizumab by patient demographic and disease characteristics across a phase 2b and 2 phase 3 trials in patients with moderate‐to‐severe chronic plaque psoriasis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Tildrakizumab is a high-affinity, anti-interleukin-23p19 monoclonal antibody approved for treatment of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of patient demographic and disease characteristics on tildrakizumab efficacy using phase 2b/3 trial data. METHODS: Data from patients who received placebo, or tildrakizumab 100 or 200 mg, in P05495 [NCT01225731], reSURFACE 1 [NCT01722331] and reSURFACE 2 [NCT01729754] were analysed. Patient subgroups were defined by age, sex, race, weight, self-reported psoriatic arthritis, failure of ≥1 traditional systemic treatment and prior biologic use. Percentage of Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 75 and 90 responders at Week 12 were compared across treatment arms in each subgroup. Absolute PASI at Weeks 0 and 12 was also determined for each subgroup. RESULTS: Among patients randomized in P05495 (N = 355), reSURFACE 1 (N = 772) and 2 (N = 1090), percentage of PASI 75 and 90 responders were significantly greater for each tildrakizumab dose vs. placebo (P < 0.0001). PASI 75 and 90 responder percentages were numerically greater in patients <65 years of age, bodyweight ≤90 kg, without psoriatic arthritis and with no prior biologic exposure (only PASI 90), vs. their counterparts in corresponding subgroups. There were no clear or consistent differences in efficacy between the other subgroups. Absolute PASI scores were generally similar across subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Small numerical differences in tildrakizumab efficacy were observed between subgroups defined by patient age and weight, presence of psoriatic arthritis and prior biologic use. These differences were not clinically meaningful; however, analyses of long-term data may be of value. Tildrakizumab efficacy did not differ with respect to patient sex or race, or number of prior failed conventional systemic treatments. Overall, these results suggest tildrakizumab may be appropriate for treatment of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis in patients with a range of demographic and disease characteristics.
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 | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".