Application of <i>E</i><sub>max</sub> model to assess the potency of topical corticosteroid products
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The objective of this study was to compare the potencies of two topical corticosteroid products (TCPs) using the E max model to fit the skin blanching responses obtained from the US FDA's vasoconstrictor assay (VCA) and to illustrate the influence of formulation on potency. The potencies of two marketed TCPs, Dermovate® cream containing clobetasol propionate (CP) and Elocon® cream containing mometasone furoate (MF), were assessed using healthy human subjects. In order to investigate the influence of formulation and associated vehicle properties, the creams were compared with their respective topical corticosteroids (TCs) from a previously published study wherein the inherent potencies of those TCs were assessed using a validated VCA method. Whereas the inherent potency of MF ( E max = −94.45 ± 0.21) was found to be greater than CP ( E max = −58.80 ± 15.65), when formulated as creams, the TCP containing CP had a higher potency ( E max = −86.15 ± 0.17) than that containing MF ( E max = −42.61 ± 26.04). This reversal of potency may be attributed to the effect of formulation factors. The comparison of the potencies of TCPs with inherent potencies of their corresponding TCs confirmed the influence of formulation parameters on the potency of those products.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".