Long-term efficacy and safety of brodalumab in psoriasis through 120 weeks and after withdrawal and retreatment: subgroup analysis of a randomized phase III trial (AMAGINE-1)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Brodalumab is efficacious for the treatment of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis through 52 weeks. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of brodalumab through 120 weeks, including following withdrawal and retreatment. METHODS: At baseline, patients were randomized to brodalumab (n = 222) or placebo (n = 220). At week 12, patients achieving a static Physician's Global Assessment (sPGA) score of 0 or 1 (sPGA 0/1) with brodalumab were rerandomized to brodalumab (n = 83) or placebo (n = 84; later re-treated with brodalumab if sPGA ≥ 3 occurred), and patients receiving placebo switched to brodalumab (n = 208). Safety was assessed by exposure-adjusted rates of treatment-emergent adverse events. RESULTS: Among those who achieved sPGA 0/1 at week 12 and were rerandomized to brodalumab, 96% and 80% using observed data, respectively, and 74% and 61% using nonresponder imputation, respectively, achieved 75% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 75) and PASI 100 at week 120. Following withdrawal from brodalumab, return of disease occurred after a mean ± SD duration of 74·7 ± 50·5 days. Among those who switched from brodalumab to placebo at week 12, PASI 75 rates using observed data and nonresponder imputation were 55% and 51% at week 20, respectively and 94% and 75% at week 120, respectively; PASI 100 rates at week 120 were 75% and 60%, respectively. Efficacy was maintained through week 120 in those receiving brodalumab after placebo. No new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that brodalumab is efficacious and safe for continuous long-term treatment of psoriasis, and support the potential for response after discontinuation and retreatment.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| 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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".