MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403665664 · doi:10.1093/bjd/ljae402

Efficacy and safety of the ustekinumab biosimilar ABP 654 in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis: a randomized double-blinded active-controlled comparative clinical study over 52 weeks

2024· article· en· W4403665664 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew Blauvelt, Kim Papp, Mona Trivedi, Vincent Chow, Daniel T. Mytych, Paul S. Yamauchi, Jeff Crowley, Janet Franklin

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Dermatology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicBiosimilars and Bioanalytical Methods
Canadian institutionsProbity Medical ResearchUniversity of Toronto
FundersAmgen
KeywordsUstekinumabMedicinePsoriasis Area and Severity IndexRandomized controlled trialClinical endpointAdverse effectInternal medicinePsoriasisRandomizationGastroenterologyDermatologyAdalimumabDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: ABP 654 is a biosimilar to ustekinumab reference product (RP). ABP 654 has been shown to have an amino acid sequence identical to ustekinumab RP and they are similar in structure, purity and potency, as well as clinical pharmacokinetics and safety in healthy volunteers. OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy, safety and immunogenicity of ABP 654 and ustekinumab RP in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis in a randomized double-blinded active-controlled single-transition comparative clinical study (NCT04607980). METHODS: Patients were randomized 1 : 1 to receive ABP 654 or ustekinumab RP at a weight-based dose of 45 mg or 90 mg administered subcutaneously on day 1 (week 0), week 4 and week 16. At week 28, patients with a ≥ 75% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) were re-randomized such that those initially randomized to ABP 654 continued to receive ABP 654 and those initially randomized to ustekinumab RP were re-randomized to either continue on ustekinumab RP or transition to ABP 654. The primary efficacy endpoint was percentage improvement in PASI from baseline to week 12. Secondary endpoints included additional efficacy measurements, as well as an assessment of adverse events and antidrug antibodies. RESULTS: At week 12, the observed mean (SD) percentage improvement in PASI from baseline was 81.9 (19.9) and 81.9 (19.6) for the ABP 654 and ustekinumab RP treatment groups, respectively. The point estimate of the mean difference in percentage PASI improvement from baseline to week 12 between the treatment groups was 0.14 with a two-sided 90% confidence interval (CI) of (-2.6 to 2.9), well within the prespecified similarity margin of (-10 to 10). In addition, throughout the study, secondary efficacy analyses and safety and immunogenicity profiles were similar across the treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that ABP 654 and ustekinumab RP are clinically similar in efficacy, safety and immunogenicity in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. Further, a single transition from ustekinumab RP to ABP 654 at week 28 had no impact on the efficacy, safety or immunogenicity results for the remainder of the 52-week study, supporting a conclusion of no clinically meaningful differences between ABP 654 and ustekinumab RP.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations14
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of DermatologySame topicBiosimilars and Bioanalytical MethodsFrench-language works237,207