Orismilast in moderate-to-severe psoriasis: Efficacy and safety from a 16-week, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, dose-finding, and phase 2b trial (IASOS)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Orismilast is a novel oral phosphodiesterase-4 (PDE4) B/D inhibitor being investigated as a potential treatment for moderate-to-severe psoriasis. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate efficacy and safety of orismilast modified-release formulation in moderate-to-severe psoriasis. METHODS: This multicenter, randomized (1:1:1:1 to 20, 30, 40 mg orismilast or placebo, twice daily), double-blinded, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, phase 2b, 16-week, dose-ranging study evaluated orismilast in adults with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis (NCT05190419). Efficacy end points were analyzed using multiple imputation. RESULTS: Of 202 randomized patients, baseline characteristics were balanced across arms, except greater severe disease proportions for orismilast vs placebo. Orismilast showed significant improvements in the primary end point, percentage change in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI), from baseline to week 16 (orismilast -52.6% to -63.7% and placebo, -17.3%; all P <.001). Greater proportions receiving orismilast achieved PASI75 (39.5%-49.0%; P <.05) and PASI90 (22.0%-28.3%; P <.05 for 20 and 40 mg) vs placebo (PASI75, 16.5% and PASI90, 8.3%) at week 16. Safety findings were as expected with PDE4 inhibition; dose-dependent tolerability effects observed. LIMITATIONS: Small sample size, disease severity imbalance between groups, limited duration and diversity in study population. CONCLUSION: Orismilast demonstrated greater efficacy vs placebo and a safety profile in line with PDE4 inhibition.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".