Deterioration of Health-Related Quality of Life After Withdrawal of Risankizumab Treatment in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Plaque Psoriasis: A Machine Learning Predictive Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Risankizumab has demonstrated efficacy in treating moderate-to-severe psoriasis. The phase-3 IMMhance trial (NCT02672852) examined the effect of continuing versus withdrawing from risankizumab treatment on psoriasis severity, including the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) and static Physician Global Assessment (sPGA). However, the effect of withdrawal on health-related quality of life (HRQL) was not assessed. Therefore, this study was conducted to evaluate the impact of risankizumab withdrawal on HRQL measured by the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI). Because DLQI was not measured beyond week 16 in IMMhance, a machine learning predictive model for DLQI was developed. METHODS: A machine learning model for DLQI was fitted using repeated measures data from three phase-3 trials (NCT02684370, NCT02684357, NCT02694523) (pooled N = 1602). An elastic-net algorithm performed automated variable selection among candidate predictors including concurrent PASI and sPGA, demographics, and interaction terms. The machine learning model was used to predict DLQI at weeks 28-104 of IMMhance among patients re-randomized to continue (N = 111) or withdraw from (N = 225) risankizumab after achieving response (sPGA = 0/1) at week 28. RESULTS: The machine learning predictive model demonstrated good statistical fit during tenfold cross-validation and external validation against observed DLQI at weeks 0-16 of IMMhance (N = 507). Predicted improvements in DLQI from baseline were lower in the withdrawal versus the continuation cohort (mean DLQI change at week 104, -5.9 versus -11.5, difference [95% CI] = 5.6 [4.1, 7.3]). Predicted DLQI deteriorated more extensively than PASI (49.7% versus 36.4%) after treatment withdrawal. CONCLUSIONS: The predicted DLQI score deteriorated more rapidly after risankizumab withdrawal than the PASI score, an objective measure of disease. These findings suggest that the deterioration in HRQL reflects more substantial impacts after risankizumab discontinuation than those measured by PASI only.
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 | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".