Safety and efficacy of nemolizumab for atopic dermatitis up to 2 years in open‐label extension study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common, chronic, relapsing, pruritic, neuroimmune skin disease, requiring long-term symptom control. OBJECTIVES: The ARCADIA long-term extension (LTE) study evaluates nemolizumab safety and efficacy in ≥12-year-old patients with moderate-to-severe AD up to 200 weeks. METHODS: Patients from previous nemolizumab AD trials (Phase 2/3) or newly recruited adolescents with moderate-to-severe AD were enrolled. A background regimen of topical corticosteroids with/without topical calcineurin inhibitors was permitted based on disease control. Long-term safety was the primary endpoint. Efficacy assessments were secondary endpoints, including the proportion of patients achieving Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) 0/1 (clear/almost clear), Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI)-75 (75% improvement from lead-in baseline in EASI), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Pruritus and VAS sleep loss ≥4-point improvement from lead-in baseline and quality of life. Observed data up to Week (W) 104 are presented for patients with previous nemolizumab experience (PNE) and no previous nemolizumab experience (NNE) at LTE baseline. RESULTS: At interim analysis data cut-off (21 July 2024), 1062 of 1901 patients completed W104. Exposure to nemolizumab in this study was equal across cohorts. The majority (92.6%) of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were mild/moderate in severity; only 22.1% were considered related to nemolizumab. The most common (≥5.0%) TEAEs were COVID-19 (19.6%), nasopharyngitis (19.5%), atopic dermatitis (18.1%), upper respiratory tract infection (12.7%), headache (6.5%) and asthma (5.5%). At LTE baseline, the proportion of PNE and NNE patients was IGA 0/1: 27.1% and 17.1%; EASI-75: 38.8% and 25.8%; VAS Pruritus ≥4-point improvement: 58.7% and 31.6%; and VAS sleep loss ≥4-point improvement: 52.9% and 31.6%, respectively. At W104, this proportion was IGA 0/1: 62.6% and 58.2%; EASI-75: 88.2% and 85.4%; VAS Pruritus ≥4-point improvement: 87.2% and 82.0%; and VAS sleep loss ≥4-point improvement: 70.8% and 68.9%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous nemolizumab treatment was well-tolerated through W104 with clinically meaningful improvements in AD signs and symptoms and patient-reported outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03989206: https://clinicaltrials.gov/search?term=NCT03989206; EUDRACT number: 2019-001889-15. Data available upon request: clinical.studies@galderma.com.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".