519 - Efficacy of prolonged ruxolitinib cream treatment for vitiligo among patients with limited or no initial response at 6 months
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction/Background Vitiligo is a chronic autoimmune disease characterized by melanocyte destruction, leading to skin depigmentation. Limited data are available regarding the efficacy of long-term topical vitiligo treatment. In 2 randomized, double-blinded, vehicle-controlled phase 3 studies in adults and adolescents (aged ≥12 y) with nonsegmental vitiligo (TRuE-V1 [NCT04052425]; TRuE-V2 [NCT04057573]), ruxolitinib cream application resulted in statistically superior improvements in repigmentation versus vehicle in the primary and all key secondary endpoints at Week 24 and was well tolerated. In the open-label period of TRuE-V1/TRuE-V2 (Weeks 24–52) and the TRuE-V long-term extension (LTE; Weeks 52–104) study (NCT04530344), further improvements in facial and body repigmentation (as assessed by Vitiligo Area Scoring Index [VASI] responses) were observed through Week 104 among patients who continued to apply ruxolitinib cream. Objectives In this pooled analysis, we evaluated shifts in facial and total body VASI (F-VASI/T-VASI) responses among patients with vitiligo who had limited or no repigmentation at Week 24 and who continued to apply ruxolitinib cream for an additional 80 weeks. Methods In TRuE-V1/TRuE-V2, patients were randomized 2:1 to apply twice-daily 1.5% ruxolitinib cream or vehicle for 24 weeks, after which all patients could apply 1.5% ruxolitinib cream through Week 52. Patients who completed TRuE-V1/TRuE-V2 were eligible to enroll in the TRuE-V LTE. Patients who did not achieve ≥90% improvement in F-VASI at Week 52 continued to apply open-label 1.5% ruxolitinib cream until Week 104. Patients initially randomized to apply ruxolitinib cream who had <25% improvement from baseline in F-VASI or T-VASI at Week 24 and had non-missing VASI assessments at the evaluated time points were included in this analysis. Shifts in F-VASI and T-VASI were assessed among patients with no facial/body repigmentation or worsening depigmentation (≤0% improvement in F-VASI/T-VASI) and patients with limited facial/body repigmentation (>0%–<25% improvement in F-VASI/T-VASI) at Week 24. Results Among patients with no facial repigmentation at Week 24, improvements in F-VASI at Weeks 52 and 104 were observed in 77.8% (49/63) and 97.1% (34/35) of patients, respectively. Among patients with limited facial repigmentation at Week 24, F-VASI improvements at Weeks 52 and 104 were observed in 64.0% (32/50) and 83.3% (30/36) of patients, respectively. Across both groups, 54.9% (39/71) of patients achieved ≥75% improvement from baseline in F-VASI (F-VASI75) at Week 104. Among those with no body repigmentation at Week 24, T-VASI improvements at Weeks 52 and 104 were observed in 79.6% (39/49) and 93.3% (28/30) of patients, respectively. For those with limited body repigmentation at Week 24, T-VASI improvements at Weeks 52 and 104 were observed in 64.5% (80/124) and 81.6% (62/76) of patients, respectively. Across both groups who had <25% improvement in total body repigmentation at Week 24, 50.0% (53/106) of patients achieved ≥50% improvement in T-VASI (T-VASI50) at Week 104. Conclusions In the TRuE-V studies, ruxolitinib cream application for an additional 80 weeks resulted in improved repigmentation among patients with nonsegmental vitiligo who had limited or no repigmentation at Week 24. These 2-year TRuE-V results highlight the importance of prolonged treatment in patients with vitiligo, even when minimal or no repigmentation is achieved after 6 months of 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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".