Long‐term, durable, absolute Psoriasis Area and Severity Index and health‐related quality of life improvements with risankizumab treatment: a <i>post hoc</i> integrated analysis of patients with moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Risankizumab has demonstrated durable, high rates of efficacy in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis as assessed by the achievement of relative Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) improvement and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) 0/1. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this post hoc analysis is to assess the achievement of absolute PASI thresholds and related improvements in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis treated with (i) risankizumab compared with ustekinumab, and (ii) long-term (>52 weeks to 172 weeks) risankizumab. METHODS: Data from patients randomised to 150 mg risankizumab or 45 or 90 mg ustekinumab in replicate randomised controlled trials UltIMMa-1 and UltIMMa-2 were analysed for the achievement of absolute PASI thresholds PASI ≤ 3, PASI ≤ 1, and PASI = 0, time to achieve these thresholds, and combined PASI and DLQI endpoints. Data from pat ients initially randomised to risankizumab who continued on risankizumab in the open-label extension study LIMMitless were analysed for the achievement of absolute PASI levels, mean DLQI scores, and DLQI 0/1. RESULTS: Significantly greater proportions of patients treated with risankizumab compared with ustekinumab achieved PASI ≤ 3, PASI ≤ 1, and PASI = 0, as well as combined endpoints for absolute PASI and DLQI [(PASI ≤ 3 and DLQI ≤ 5) or (PASI ≤ 1 and DLQI 0/1)]. The median time to first achieve PASI ≤ 3, PASI ≤ 1, and PASI = 0 was significantly lower for risankizumab-treated patients compared with ustekinumab-treated patients. Among patients treated with long-term risankizumab, more than 90% achieved PASI ≤ 3 though week 172 and more than 80% achieved DLQI 0/1. Low absolute PASI scores corresponded with low mean absolute DLQI scores through week 172 of continuous risankizumab treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Risankizumab treatment demonstrated high rates of rapid and durable efficacy as measured by absolute PASI thresholds and improvements in patient HRQoL.
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 | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".