Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Psoriasis Treatments in Patients with Concomitant Metabolic Syndrome: A Narrative Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Metabolic syndrome (MetS) is well recognized as a frequent comorbidity of psoriasis with important implications for efficacy and safety of psoriasis treatment. The presence of concomitant MetS is associated with decreased efficacy response to biologic treatment for psoriasis in observational studies. In post hoc analyses of clinical trial data, the anti-IL-23p19 antibody tildrakizumab appears to maintain efficacy in patients compared to those without MetS; no published subgroup analyses by MetS status are yet available for other biologics. However, there is some evidence that obese patients have decreased psoriasis treatment efficacy with biologics with certain mechanisms of action relative to overweight patients. This confounds interpretation of the effect of MetS due to the association between MetS and body weight. Because of the association between MetS and cardiovascular risk, treatment of psoriasis in patients with concomitant MetS requires special consideration for cardiovascular safety and attention to potential for exacerbation of MetS and related conditions, including nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Additional studies are needed to clarify the risks for treatment failure and cardiovascular safety concerns in patients with psoriasis and concomitant MetS.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".