Bibliographic record
Abstract
https://doi.org/10.1093/bjd/ljac080 In this issue of the BJD, King et al. present safety data from phase III studies conducted with baricitinib in adult patients with alopecia areata (AA).1 This type of analysis is important as the safety profile of a drug may differ according to the patient population under study. King et al. report that the frequency of acne was higher for baricitinib 2 mg and 4 mg (5.8% and 5.6%, respectively) compared with placebo (1.1%). The frequency of herpes zoster was also higher for baricitinib 2 mg and 4 mg (1.4% and 0.9%, respectively) compared with placebo (0.5%). Blood creatinine phosphokinase was also increased in patients treated with 4 mg. These side-effects have all been reported with other Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi).2 No deep vein thrombosis (DVT) was reported but there was one case of pulmonary embolism and one case of myocardial infarction. It is important to note that the protocol defined DVT as thrombosis of a deep vein above the knee and that patients with a previous history or risk factors of venous thromboembolic events (VTE) were excluded.3 A recent noninferiority randomized study conducted in 4362 patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), 50 years of age or older with at least one additional cardiovascular risk factor, showed increased risks of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and cancer for patients randomized to tofacitinib compared with adalimumab.4 In this study, patients were allowed to continue methotrexate and to use prednisone up to 10 mg daily. Other studies and registries have also suggested a higher risk of MACE and VTE for tofacitinib, especially for patients with RA with risk factors for, or previous history of, MACE or VTE.5 Risks of MACE and cancers for other JAKi with and without the concomitant use of immunosuppressants have not been studied in randomized safety noninferiority trials.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".