Efficacy of dupilumab in moderate and severe atopic dermatitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Treatment responses may differ between patients with severe versus moderate atopic dermatitis (AD). Objectives To assess dupilumab response by baseline AD severity in adolescent and adult patients with moderate‐to‐severe AD. Methods We assessed dupilumab response by baseline AD severity in 1719 patients aged ≥12 years with moderate‐to‐severe AD from five randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trials. Patients received subcutaneous placebo or dupilumab as monotherapy (300 mg [adults, adolescents] or 200 mg [adolescents] every 2 weeks; 16 weeks), or with concomitant topical corticosteroids (TCS) (adults; 16/52 weeks). Patients were stratified by baseline Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) score (3 [moderate]/4 [severe]). Results Dupilumab‐treated patients with moderate AD had numerically higher absolute proportions of patients achieving IGA 0/1 (clear/almost clear) than those with severe AD; risk differences (dupilumab vs. placebo) were 18.9–35.5 for moderate AD and 16.4–34.2 for severe AD. For all other endpoints assessed, no meaningful differences or consistent response patterns between moderate and severe subgroups were observed. Conclusions Dupilumab with or without TCS demonstrated similar efficacy in patients with moderate or severe 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.
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 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".