Impact of fixed‐dose combination Cal/BD foam on the work productivity of patients with psoriasis: results from the 52‐week randomized, double‐blind, PSO‐LONG trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Psoriasis contributes to unemployment, work impairment, missed workdays and substantial indirect costs due to lost productivity. Combination Cal/BD foam is the only topical that is approved for long-term maintenance treatment of plaque psoriasis for 52 weeks. This is the first known investigation of the effect of topical psoriasis therapy on productivity. OBJECTIVE: To examine the change in work productivity and activity impairment after 4 weeks of treatment with fixed-dose combination calcipotriol 50 µg/g/betamethasone dipropionate 0.5 mg/g (Cal/BD) foam and observe long-term changes after 52 weeks of long-term management (proactive or reactive treatment). METHODS: This is a post-hoc analysis of the PSO-LONG trial - a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, vehicle-controlled, parallel group, international multi-centre trial of treatment with combination Cal/BD foam. Work and activity impairment due to psoriasis were assessed by the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) and the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Psoriasis (WPAI:PSO) questionnaire at baseline, week 4, week 28 and week 56. The improvement in hours of work productivity was translated into monthly and annual indirect cost savings estimates for patients in Italy, Sweden, United Kingdom, Canada and Germany. RESULTS: Using fixed-dose combination Cal/BD foam for four weeks significantly reduced psoriasis-related work presenteeism, total work productivity impairment (TWPI) and total activity impairment (TAI) over 56 weeks, with significant improvements observed as early as 4 weeks after the baseline visit. The proportion of patients reporting impact on work productivity (as measured by presenteeism and TWPI) and activity impairment (as measured by both DLQI-Q7b and TAI) also decreased. CONCLUSION: Fixed-dose combination Cal/BD foam used for long-term management of psoriasis significantly reduces psoriasis-related work productivity and activity impairment which may result in substantial indirect cost savings. Clinical Trial Registration NCT02899962, EudraCT number: 2016-000556-95.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".