MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3193360717 · doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2021.07.036

Upadacitinib plus topical corticosteroids in atopic dermatitis: Week 52 AD Up study results

2021· article· en· W3193360717 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan I. Silverberg, Marjolein de Bruin‐Weller, Thomas Bieber, Weily Soong, Kenji Kabashima, Antonio Costanzo, David Rosmarin, Charles Lynde, John Liu, Amy Gamelli, Jiewei Zeng, Barry Ladizinski, Alvina D. Chu, Kristian Reich

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatology and Skin Diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoProbity Medical Research
FundersAbbVie
KeywordsAtopic dermatitisMedicineDermatology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Primary (week 16) results from the ongoing phase 3, double-blind AD Up study (NCT03568318) demonstrate a positive benefit-risk profile for upadacitinib + topical corticosteroid (TCS) in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib + TCS through 52 weeks. METHODS: Patients aged 12 to 75 years with chronic moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (≥10% of body surface area affected, Eczema Area and Severity Index [EASI] ≥16, Validated Investigator's Global Assessment for atopic dermatitis [vIGA-AD] ≥3, and Worst Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale [WP-NRS] score ≥4) were randomized 1:1:1 to once-daily upadacitinib 15 mg + TCS, upadacitinib 30 mg + TCS, or placebo (PBO) + TCS (rerandomized at week 16 to upadacitinib + TCS). Safety and efficacy, including proportion of patients experiencing ≥75% improvement in EASI (EASI-75), vIGA-AD of clear/almost clear with improvement ≥2 grades (vIGA-AD 0/1), and WP-NRS improvement ≥4, were assessed through week 52. Missing data were primarily handled by nonresponse imputation incorporating multiple imputation for missing values due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). RESULTS: Of 901 patients, 300 were randomized to upadacitinib 15 mg + TCS, 297 to upadacitinib 30 mg + TCS, and 304 to PBO + TCS. For all end points, efficacy for upadacitinib 15 mg + TCS and upadacitinib 30 mg + TCS at week 16 was maintained through week 52. At week 52, the proportions of patients treated with upadacitinib 15 mg + TCS and upadacitinib 30 mg + TCS who experienced EASI-75 were 50.8% and 69.0%, respectively; 33.5% and 45.2%, respectively, experienced vIGA-AD 0/1; and 45.3% and 57.5%, respectively, experienced WP-NRS improvement ≥4. Upadacitinib + TCS was well tolerated through 52 weeks; no new important safety risks beyond the current label were observed. No deaths were reported; major adverse cardiovascular events and venous thromboembolic events were infrequent (≤0.2/100 patient-years). CONCLUSIONS: Results through 52 weeks demonstrate long-term maintenance of efficacy and a favorable safety profile of upadacitinib + TCS in patients with moderate-to-severe AD.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.119
Threshold uncertainty score0.414

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations124
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Allergy and Clinical ImmunologySame topicDermatology and Skin DiseasesFrench-language works237,207