MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412557775 · doi:10.1177/2050313x251359029

Biologic and small molecule therapies for psoriasis in individuals with Down syndrome: Two cases and a systematic review

2025· review· en· W4412557775 on OpenAlexaff
Michal Moshkovich, Jonah Perlmutter, Ronald Vender

Bibliographic record

VenueSAGE Open Medical Case Reports · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Lymphoblastic Leukemia research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePsoriasisSecukinumabAcitretinUstekinumabMethotrexateDermatologyDown syndromeIxekizumabIntensive care medicineImmunologyAdalimumabInternal medicineDiseasePsoriatic arthritisPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Down syndrome (DS), also known as trisomy 21, is a genetic condition linked to a higher prevalence of skin disorders, including psoriasis, which affects up to 8% of individuals. DS patients with psoriasis present unique management considerations, including a theoretical increased risk of infectious complications with immunosuppressive therapies. This report includes two cases and a systematic review summarizing available evidence on psoriasis characteristics and treatment outcomes in individuals with DS. We report two DS patients with psoriasis demonstrating variable therapeutic responses: one controlled with acitretin and another requiring secukinumab after multiple treatment failures. To contextualize these findings, we conducted a systematic review following PRISMA guidelines, identifying 10 studies comprising 37 DS patients with psoriasis. Methotrexate was the most frequently failed therapy. Biologics targeting IL-17 and IL-23 pathways achieved the highest rates of complete resolution. These findings reflect Th1/Th17-driven inflammation in DS and highlight the need for individualized, pathway-specific management strategies.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.111
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.339 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAGE Open Medical Case ReportsSame topicAcute Lymphoblastic Leukemia researchFrench-language works237,207