Relationship Among Treatment, Pruritus, Investigator’s Static Global Assessment, and Quality of Life in Patients with Atopic Dermatitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The Investigator's Static Global Assessment (ISGA) is a 5-point rating scale that is recommended by the US Food and Drug Administration for assessing the severity of atopic dermatitis (AD), and ISGA success is a widely used endpoint in AD clinical studies. In this study, we seek to interpret the relationship of ISGA with treatment, pruritus, and quality of life (QoL) by conducting post hoc analyses of pooled data from two phase 3 crisaborole studies. METHODS: Patients aged ≥ 2 years with baseline ISGA of 2 (mild) or 3 (moderate) were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive crisaborole or vehicle for 28 days. Disease severity, pruritus severity, and QoL were assessed with the ISGA, Severity of Pruritus Scale (SPS), and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI; patients aged ≥ 16 years), or Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI; patients aged 2-15 years), respectively. The effect of treatment on ISGA and the relationship between ISGA and QoL were analyzed using a longitudinal repeated-measures model. The interrelationship between treatment, disease severity, pruritus, and QoL was analyzed with a mediation model. RESULTS: Overall, 1522 patients (crisaborole, n = 1016; vehicle, n = 506) were included. Estimated longitudinal profiles indicated changes in ISGA by day 8 were large for crisaborole (effect size [ES]: - 0.68) and small for vehicle (ES: - 0.34). There was a direct relationship between ISGA and DLQI and CDLQI severity bands in the longitudinal repeated-measures model. For both QoL mediation models, treatment effects on QoL were mediated indirectly by reduction in pruritus (DLQI, 42.4%; CDLQI, 58.1%) and disease severity (DLQI, 12.2%; CDLQI, 33.1%). CONCLUSIONS: These post hoc analyses suggest that ISGA success is a clinically meaningful endpoint associated with reduction in the severity of pruritus and improvement in QoL.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".