MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Association of Risk of Incident Venous Thromboembolism With Atopic Dermatitis and Treatment With Janus Kinase Inhibitors

2022· review· en· W4292940403 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA Dermatology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatology and Skin Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHazard ratioAtopic dermatitisInternal medicineCochrane LibraryCohort studyPlaceboIncidence (geometry)CohortRandomized controlled trialMeta-analysisMEDLINEGuidelineConfidence intervalDermatologyAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance: The risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) among patients with atopic dermatitis (AD), especially when receiving treatment with Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors, is unclear. Objective: To determine the association of AD with incident VTE and evaluate the risk of incident VTE among patients with AD who were receiving treatment with JAK inhibitors. Data Sources: The MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched with no restrictions on language nor geographic locations from their respective inception to February 5, 2022. Study Selection: Cohort studies examining the association of AD with incident VTE and randomized clinical trials (RCTs) reporting VTE events in participants with AD receiving JAK inhibitors were included. Around 0.7% of initially identified articles met the selection criteria. Data Extraction and Synthesis: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline was followed. The risk of bias of included cohort studies and RCTs was assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2, respectively. A random-effects model meta-analysis was conducted to calculate the pooled hazard ratio (HR) and risk difference for incident VTE. Main Outcomes and Measures: The HRs for incident VTE associated with AD and risk difference for incident VTE between participants with AD who were receiving treatment with JAK inhibitors and controls receiving placebo or dupilumab. Results: Two cohort studies and 15 RCTs with a total of 466 993 participants were included. The meta-analysis found no significant association of AD with incident VTE (HR, 0.95; 95% CI 0.62-1.45; incidence rate of VTE, 0.23 events/100 patient-years). Overall, 3 of 5722 patients with AD (0.05%) who were receiving treatment with JAK inhibitors experienced VTE compared with 1 of 3065 patients with AD (0.03%) receiving placebo or dupilumab (Mantel-Haenszel risk difference, 0; 95% CI, 0-0). The incidence rate of VTE was 0.15 and 0.12 events per 100 patient-years in participants with AD receiving JAK inhibitors and placebo, respectively. The findings were similar in 4 unique JAK inhibitors (abrocitinib, baricitinib, upadacitinib, and SHR0302). Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that the currently available evidence does not detect an increased risk of VTE associated with AD or treatment with JAK inhibitors. These findings may provide a reference for clinicians in prescribing JAK inhibitors for patients with AD.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.899
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.255 · 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