MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281382713 · doi:10.1111/bjd.21677

Biomarkers of systemic treatment response in people with psoriasis: a scoping review

2022· review· en· W4281382713 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Mark Corbett, Ravi Ramessur, David Marshall, Márcio Luís Acencio, Marek Ostaszewski, Inês A. Barbosa, Nick Dand, Paola Di Meglio, Salma Haddad, Andreas H.M. Jensen, Witte Koopmann, Satveer K. Mahil, Seher Rahmatulla, Joe Rastrick, Jake Saklatvala, Stephan Weidinger, Kath Wright, Kilian Eyerich, Matladi Ndlovu, Curdin Conrad, Lone Skov, Catherine Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Dermatology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicPsoriasis: Treatment and Pathogenesis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research CouncilBanting and Best Diabetes Centre, University of TorontoCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchInnovative Medicines InitiativeAstellas PharmaNovo NordiskNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchDepartment of Medicine, University of TorontoPsoriasis AssociationDepartment of Health and Social CareEuropean CommissionSanofiKidney Foundation of CanadaMerck CanadaUniversity of TorontoEuropean Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and AssociationsAstraZenecaEli Lilly and CompanyKing's College LondonGilead SciencesVifor PharmaHeart and Stroke Foundation of CanadaAmgen
KeywordsPsoriasisMedicineIntensive care medicineDermatology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Responses to the systemic treatments commonly used to treat psoriasis vary. Biomarkers that accurately predict effectiveness and safety would enable targeted treatment selection, improved patient outcomes and more cost-effective healthcare. OBJECTIVES: To perform a scoping review to identify and catalogue candidate biomarkers of systemic treatment response in psoriasis for the translational research community. METHODS: A systematic search of CENTRAL, Embase, LILACS and MEDLINE was performed for relevant articles published between 1990 and December 2021. Eligibility criteria were studies involving patients with psoriasis (any age, n ≥ 50) reporting biomarkers associated with systemic treatment response. The main outcomes were any measure of systemic treatment efficacy or safety. Data were extracted by one reviewer and checked by a second; studies meeting minimal quality criteria (use of methods to control for confounding) were formally assessed for bias. Candidate biomarkers were identified by an expert multistakeholder group using a majority voting consensus exercise and mapped to relevant cellular and molecular pathways. RESULTS: Of 71 included studies (67 studying effectiveness outcomes and eight safety outcomes; four studied both), most reported genomic or proteomic biomarkers associated with response to biologics (48 studies). Methodological or reporting limitations frequently compromised the interpretation of findings, including inadequate control for key covariates, lack of adjustment for multiple testing, and selective outcome reporting. We identified candidate biomarkers of efficacy to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors [variation in CARD14, CDKAL1, IL1B, IL12B and IL17RA loci, and lipopolysaccharide-induced phosphorylation of nuclear factor (NF)-κB in type 2 dendritic cells] and ustekinumab (HLA-C*06:02 and variation in an IL1B locus). None were supported by sufficient evidence for clinical use without further validation studies. Candidate biomarkers were found to be involved in the immune cellular crosstalk implicated in psoriasis pathogenesis, most notably antigen presentation, T helper (Th)17 cell differentiation, positive regulation of NF-κB, and Th17 cell activation. CONCLUSIONS: This comprehensive catalogue provides a key resource for researchers and reveals a diverse range of biomarker types and outcomes in the included studies. The candidate biomarkers identified require further evaluation in methodologically robust studies to establish potential clinical utility. Future studies should aim to address the common methodological limitations highlighted in this review to expedite discovery and validation of biomarkers for clinical use. What is already known about this topic? Responses to the systemic treatments commonly used to treat psoriasis vary. Biomarkers that accurately predict effectiveness and safety would enable targeted treatment selection, improved patient outcomes and more cost-effective healthcare. What does this study add? This review provides a comprehensive catalogue of investigated biomarkers of systemic treatment response in psoriasis. A diverse range of biomarker types and outcomes was found in the included studies, serving as a key resource for the translational research community.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.935
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.264 · 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.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations42
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of DermatologySame topicPsoriasis: Treatment and PathogenesisFrench-language works237,207