Bimekizumab Efficacy and Safety in Japanese Patients with Plaque Psoriasis in BE VIVID: A Phase 3, Ustekinumab and Placebo-Controlled Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Bimekizumab treatment resulted in improved clinical outcomes in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis in BE VIVID, a 52-week, phase 3, randomized, ustekinumab and placebo-controlled study. We present data from the BE VIVID Japan patient subpopulation. METHODS: Globally, patients were randomized to receive bimekizumab 320 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W), ustekinumab (45/90 mg weight-based at baseline and week 4, then every 12 weeks), or placebo (Q4W through week 16, then bimekizumab 320 mg Q4W). Efficacy endpoints included week 16 Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90 and Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) 0/1, and other outcomes [PASI 100, PASI 75, IGA 0, Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) 0/1, absolute PASI, scalp IGA, Psoriasis Symptoms and Impacts Measure (P-SIM) responses]. Safety analyses were conducted. RESULTS: There were 108 Japanese randomized patients (bimekizumab: 62; ustekinumab: 29; placebo: 17). At week 16, bimekizumab-treated patients had a higher clinical response versus ustekinumab and placebo (PASI 90: 85.5% versus 51.7% and 5.9%; IGA 0/1: 82.3% versus 48.3% and 0.0%). Over 52 weeks, improved clinical response was maintained with bimekizumab, including patients switching from placebo at week 16. Overall, the safety profile in Japanese patients was consistent with that observed in the global population. CONCLUSION: Bimekizumab resulted in improved clinical response versus ustekinumab and placebo, and was well-tolerated in Japanese patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03370133.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".