MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3213457292 · doi:10.1007/s13555-021-00621-w

Efficacy of Dupilumab in Atopic Dermatitis: The Patient’s Perspective

2021· article· en· W3213457292 on OpenAlexaff
Marjolein de Bruin‐Weller, Joseph F. Merola, Chih-ho Hong, Karel Ettler, Debra Sierka, Dimittri Delevry, Zhen Chen, Ana B. Rossi

Bibliographic record

VenueDermatology and Therapy · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatology and Skin Diseases
Canadian institutionsProbity Medical ResearchUniversity of British Columbia
FundersSanofi GenzymeRegeneron PharmaceuticalsSanofi
KeywordsDupilumabAtopic dermatitisMedicineDermatology Life Quality IndexPlaceboQuality of life (healthcare)Eczema Area and Severity IndexInternal medicineDermatologyDiseaseClinical trialAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Atopic dermatitis (AD), a predominantly type 2 inflammatory skin disease, affects approximately 2-5% of adults, with a high burden of disease. In moderate-to-severe AD, lesions can be extensive and pruritus intense with patients experiencing skin pain, sleep and mental health disturbances, and diminished quality of life (QoL). METHODS: The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of dupilumab for the treatment of AD from the patients' perspective using patient-reported outcome data from four clinical trials (CHRONOS, SOLO 1&2, and CAFÉ) in patients (N = 1553) receiving either the approved 300 mg q2w dupilumab with/without topical corticosteroids (TCS) dose or control (placebo or placebo + TCS). Patient Global Assessment of Disease Status (PGADS) was used to measure patients' well-being and Patient Global Assessment of Treatment Effect (PGATE) was used to measure treatment efficacy. Patients were asked "Considering all the ways in which your eczema affects you, indicate how well you are doing" to assess their perception of well-being and "How would you rate the way your eczema responded to the study medication?" to assess their perception of treatment effect. Possible responses for both metrics included poor, fair, good, very good, and excellent. RESULTS: In all four studies, a significantly higher proportion of dupilumab-treated patients reported "Good"/"Very Good"/"Excellent" disease status from week 2 through study end versus control (CHRONOS, 52 weeks: 69.8% vs. 25.1%; SOLO 1&2, 16 weeks: 59.5% vs. 24.6%; CAFÉ, 16 weeks: 84.1% vs. 45.4%; all P < 0.0001), and significantly more dupilumab-treated patients reported "Good"/"Very Good"/"Excellent" treatment efficacy versus control (CHRONOS: 72.6% vs. 24.8%; SOLO 1&2: 65.0% vs. 21.1%; CAFÉ, 16 weeks: 85.0% vs. 36.1%; all P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Adult patients with AD perceived that dupilumab with/without concomitant TCS was highly efficacious and improved overall disease status and well-being as early as week 2 and throughout treatment periods up to 1 year. Video Abstract (MP4 90521 kb).

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)0.000
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 score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.260

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDermatology and TherapySame topicDermatology and Skin DiseasesFrench-language works237,207