MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377088514 · doi:10.1089/derm.2022.0096

A Review of Dupilumab-Induced Adverse Events to Dermatologists and the Potential Pathogenesis in the Treatment of Atopic Dermatitis

2023· review· en· W4377088514 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jun-Hong Tsai, Tsen-Fang Tsai

Bibliographic record

VenueDermatitis · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatology and Skin Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDupilumabMedicineAtopic dermatitisDermatologyAdverse effectDiscontinuationPsoriasisEfalizumabSecukinumabMEDLINEInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dupilumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting interleukin-4 antibody, is approved for use in many type 2 inflammatory diseases, including atopic dermatitis. It is generally well tolerated with no need of routine laboratory monitoring. However, several adverse events have been reported during real-world practice and in pivotal trials. We conducted a systematic literature research of the PubMed, Medline, and Embase databases to identify articles recording the clinical manifestation and potential pathogenesis of these adverse events with interests (AEIs) to dermatologists. In total, 547 cases from 134 studies have developed 39 AEIs 1 day to 2.5 years after dupilumab treatment. The most common AEIs are facial and neck dermatitis (299 cases), psoriasis (70 cases), arthralgia (56 cases), alopecia (21 cases), cutaneous T cell lymphoma (19 cases), severe ocular diseases (19 cases), and drug eruption (6 cases). Most of the AEIs recorded in this review resolved or improved after dupilumab discontinuation or the addition of another treatment, whereas 3 of the cases died of severe AEI. The potential pathogenesis included T help type 1 (Th1)/T help type 2 (Th2) imbalance, Th2/T help type 17 (Th17) imbalance, immune reconstitution, hypersensitivity reaction, transient hypereosinophilia related, and Th1 suppression. Clinicians should be alert of these AEIs for timely diagnosis and appropriate treatment.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.730
Threshold uncertainty score0.915

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDermatitisSame topicDermatology and Skin DiseasesFrench-language works237,207