SPECTREM phase IIIb clinical trial results through week 16: guselkumab efficacy and safety for the treatment of low body surface area, moderate psoriasis with high-impact site involvement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients with psoriasis affecting a low percentage of their body surface area (BSA) are under-represented in clinical studies and may face substantial disease burden if high-impact sites are affected. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate in a phase IIIb randomized placebo-controlled study (SPECTREM; NCT06039189) the efficacy and safety of guselkumab in participants with low BSA (2-15%), moderate [Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) = 3] plaque psoriasis involving one or more high-impact site (scalp, face, genitals, intertriginous areas). METHODS: Eligible participants were randomized 2 : 1 to receive guselkumab 100 mg or placebo at week 0 and week 4, then every 8 weeks. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants achieving IGA 0/1 (cleared/minimal) at week 16. Major secondary endpoints included the proportion of participants achieving ≥ 90% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 90), IGA 0 and 100% improvement in PASI (PASI 100); mean percentage improvements from baseline to week 16 in BSA and PASI; and proportions of participants achieving site-specific IGA or Physician's Global Assessment (PGA) 0/1 among those with scalp, facial, genital or intertriginous site-specific IGA/PGA ≥ 3 at baseline. RESULTS: Among the 338 randomized participants (guselkumab, n = 225; placebo, n = 113), mean (SD) baseline BSA was 7.6% (3.7) and PASI was 9.0 (3.8). At week 16, all primary and major secondary endpoints were met, with guselkumab demonstrating superiority vs. placebo (all P < 0.001) in the proportions of participants achieving IGA 0/1 (74.2% vs. 12.4%), IGA 0 (40.4% vs. 3.5%), PASI 90 (52.9% vs. 6.2%) and PASI 100 (32.4% vs. 2.7%), and mean percentage improvement from baseline in BSA (80.6% vs. 6.1%) and PASI (82.6% vs. 13.7%). Site-specific IGA/PGA 0/1 response rates for guselkumab vs. placebo were as follows: scalp 75.0% (n = 114/152) vs. 14.5% (n = 11/76); face 87.8% (n = 79/90) vs. 28.6% (n = 12/42); genital 78.0% (n = 64/82) vs. 37.5% (n = 15/40) and intertriginous 86.5% (n = 96/111) vs. 28.8% (n = 15/52). In the guselkumab and placebo groups, respectively, 37.8% and 39.8% experienced one or more adverse event; no new safety signals were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Through week 16, guselkumab was effective and well tolerated in participants with low BSA, moderate plaque psoriasis with involvement of high-impact sites. Statistically significant improvements across multiple clearance measures, irrespective of baseline BSA, support the effectiveness of guselkumab across a broad range of patients.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
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".