MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391610049 · doi:10.1093/bjd/ljad498.005

494 - Efficacy and safety of lebrikizumab is maintained to two years in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis

2024· article· en· W4391610049 on OpenAlexaff
Emma Guttman‐Yassky, Stephan Weidinger, Eric L. Simpson, Melinda Gooderham, Alan D. Irvine, Lynda Spelman, Jonathan I. Silverberg, Hany Elmaraghy, Louise DeLuca-Carter, Maria Lucia Buziqui Piruzeli, Chaoran Hu, Fan Emily Yang, Evangeline Pierce, Laia Bardolet, Diamant Thaçi

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Dermatology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatology and Skin Diseases
Canadian institutionsProbity Medical ResearchQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAtopic dermatitisMedicineDermatology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Lebrikizumab is a novel monoclonal antibody that binds with high affinity and slow off-rate to IL-13, thereby blocking the downstream effects of IL-13 with high potency. The efficacy and safety of lebrikizumab have been investigated in a number of Phase 3 trials including: ADvocate1 (NCT04146363), ADvocate2 (NCT04178967), ADhere (NCT04250337), and ADjoin (NCT04392154). Lebrikizumab (with or without TCS) was efficacious in providing clinically meaningful improvements in the signs and symptoms of AD through Week(W) 52 in adult and adolescent patients with moderate-to-severe AD. Objectives We report the efficacy and safety of lebrikizumab (LEB) in the long-term extension study ADjoin (NCT04392154) following 104 weeks of continuous LEB treatment with and without TCS use. Methods Patients in ADvocate1&2 who achieved either EASI 75 or IGA 0/1 (without rescue) at W16 were re-randomized 2:2:1 to LEB250mg Q2W, LEB250mg Q4W, or placebo (LEB withdrawal). Patients who completed W52 of ADvocate1&2 were able to enroll in ADjoin. Patients in ADhere who achieved either EASI 75 or IGA 0/1 (without rescue) at W16 were able to enroll into ADjoin and randomized 2:1 to LEB250mg Q2W or LEB250mg Q4W. Data are reported for patients originating from ADvocate1&2 and ADhere who received LEB250mg Q2W or Q4W in ADjoin. Efficacy outcomes were assessed based on all collected data (as observed analysis) up to 104W of LEB treatment. Safety was reported from ADjoin enrollment up to the data cut-off April 14, 2023. Results At W104, IGA 0/1 was maintained by 38/44 (86.4%; Q2W) and 42/55 (76.4%; Q4W) patients from ADvocate1&2 and 26/31 (83.9%; Q2W) and 11/14 (78.6%; Q4W) patients from ADhere. EASI 75 was maintained by 65/68 (95.6%; Q2W) and 77/80 (96.3% Q4W) ADvocate1&2 patients and 39/41 (95.1%; Q2W) and 24/25 (96.0%; Q4W) ADhere patients at W104. In patients who achieved EASI 75 at W16, EASI 90 was achieved by 56/68 (82.4%; Q2W) and 66/80 (82.5%; Q4W) ADvocate1&2 patients and 35/41 (85.4%; Q2W) and 18/25 (72.0%; Q4W) ADhere patients at 104W. During ADjoin, 166/267 (62.2%) patients from the subpopulations of ADvocate1&2 and ADhere who received LEB Q2W or Q4W in ADjoin reported adverse events (AEs), most of which were mild (31.5%, n=84) or moderate (27.0%, n=72) in severity. Serious AEs were reported by 10 (3.8%) patients. There was one death in the ADhere Q2W arm. Six (2.3%) patients reported AEs leading to treatment discontinuation. The safety profile of LEB in ADjoin is consistent with that observed during ADvocate1&2 and ADhere. Conclusions Efficacy outcomes were maintained long-term, over 2 years of continuous LEB treatment, in both LEB250mg Q2W and Q4W arms. The safety profile of LEB in ADjoin is consistent with previous LEB studies in patients with moderate-to-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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of DermatologySame topicDermatology and Skin DiseasesFrench-language works237,207