Deucravacitinib in plaque psoriasis: Safety and efficacy through 3 years in Japanese patients in the phase 3 <scp>POETYK PSO</scp> ‐1, <scp>PSO</scp> ‐4, and <scp>LTE</scp> trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deucravacitinib, an oral, selective, allosteric tyrosine kinase 2 inhibitor, was effective and well tolerated at a dose of 6 mg once daily through 1 year (52 weeks) in patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis in the phase 3 POETYK PSO-1 and POETYK PSO-4 trials. Patients completing PSO-1 or PSO-4 could enter the ongoing POETYK long-term extension trial and receive open-label deucravacitinib. Safety and efficacy were evaluated through 3 years (148 weeks; data cutoff date: June 15, 2022) in Japanese patients in these trials. Safety was assessed via adverse events (AEs). Efficacy endpoints, including ≥75% reduction from baseline in the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 75) and static Physician Global Assessment (sPGA) score of 0/1 (clear/almost clear), were evaluated in patients receiving continuous deucravacitinib treatment from baseline in PSO-1 and PSO-4 and in PSO-1 patients crossing over from placebo to deucravacitinib at week 16. At data cutoff, 125 patients had received at least one deucravacitinib dose; 86.4% had >24 months and 27.2% had >36 months of total deucravacitinib exposure. Exposure-adjusted incidence rates per 100 person-years for AEs were: any AEs, 188.5; discontinuations attributable to AEs, 3.2; serious AEs, 7.4; serious infections, 1.3; herpes zoster events, 1.6; major adverse cardiovascular events, 0.6; venous thromboembolic events, 0; and malignancies, 1.0. Clinical responses (as observed) were maintained in PSO-1 patients receiving continuous deucravacitinib treatment from baseline (PASI 75: year 1, 88.9%; year 3, 87.5%; sPGA 0/1: year 1, 74.1%; year 3, 66.7%). Year 1 response rates were also maintained through year 3 in PSO-4 patients and in PSO-1 placebo crossovers. Response rates were also consistent using modified nonresponder imputation and treatment failure rules data imputation methodologies. These findings support the consistent safety profile and durable efficacy of deucravacitinib through 3 years in Japanese patients with psoriasis. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03624127; NCT03924427; NCT04036435.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".