Can Dose Spacing of IL-17i Maintain Efficacy in Psoriasis?
METHODOLOGY:
This retrospective cohort study analysed the effectiveness and survival of patients with psoriasis undergoing therapeutic biologic dose spacing of secukinumab or brodalumab.
The analysis included 80 patients; 38.75% of them received secukinumab and 61.25% received brodalumab.
Dose spacing was defined as extending secukinumab dosing to every 6 weeks and brodalumab to every 3 weeks after induction. All patients underwent 50% dose spacing of the approved range after a mean treatment duration of 35 months.
Researchers monitored mean Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI) scores, PASI100, PASI90, and PASI ≤ 1. The mean follow-up duration under the dose-spacing regimen was 6.7 months.
TAKEAWAY:
The mean PASI value was 0.7 after 3 months of dose spacing and 0.1 after 12 months. No significant differences in mean PASI scores were observed between secukinumab and brodalumab at any timepoint after dose spacing.
PASI100 achievement was 91.25% at dose-spacing initiation and remained stable throughout the following year; 99% of patients achieved PASI90 and 100% achieved PASI ≤ 1 at dose-spacing initiation, and both rates were maintained at 12 months.
The 12-month drug survival rate for the dose-spacing regimen was 66.1%, with 25% of patients returning to standard dosage and 66.7% of these cases regaining PASI100.
Secukinumab demonstrated higher drug survival after dose spacing than brodalumab (78.3% vs 58.9%).
IN PRACTICE:
"No significant differences in effectiveness were found between secukinumab and brodalumab in patients undergoing a D-S [dose-spacing] regimen. Overall, dose de-escalation of IL-17 inhibitors in patients with psoriasis who have achieved a stable response seems an effective therapeutic strategy, even if 2 of 5 patients returned to the original regimen after 1 year. When coming back to the standard regimen after D-S, PASI was regained by two-thirds of patients after 6 months," the authors of the study wrote.
SOURCE:
This study was led by Luca Mastorino, Dermatology Clinic, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Turin, Turin, Italy. It was published online on June 12, 2025, in Clinical and Experimental Dermatology .
LIMITATIONS:
The study's real-life design and retrospective nature may have introduced potential biases. The relatively small sample size could have affected the generalisability of the findings. The analysis of observed cases may have affected the interpretation of long-term outcomes.
DISCLOSURES:
This study did not receive any specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. The authors reported having no relevant conflicts of interest.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Shares of Brazil's Fleury jump on reports of talks with Rede D'Or
SAO PAULO (Reuters) -Shares of Brazilian medical diagnostics company Fleury jumped on Monday after reports of a potential acquisition by hospital chain Rede D'Or, which analysts said could generate synergies. Fleury's shares rose more than 15% in trading in Sao Paulo, making it the biggest gainer on benchmark stock index Bovespa, which was up 0.6%. Rede D'Or, meanwhile, gained 1.2%. Multiple local media outlets said on Sunday that Rede D'Or was in talks with Fleury on a deal that could combine Brazil's largest integrated healthcare network with a leading medical lab chain. Brazil Journal reported, citing sources, that Rede D'Or was working on an offer that could include both a cash payment and share swap. Fleury counts lender Bradesco as one of its main shareholders. Rede D'Or said on Monday it continuously evaluates opportunities to expand, including potential acquisitions or business combinations, but that no decision or proposal had been made for a potential deal with Fleury. In a separate statement, Fleury said it regularly analyzes market conditions but also noted that no decision had been reached on a potential transaction with Rede D'Or. Goldman Sachs analysts said Fleury could benefit under Rede D'Or's management from better procurement terms, especially on materials, in which there would be some overlap, and a leaner general and administrative structure. Fleury has a market capitalization of 6.91 billion reais ($1.24 billion), while Rede D'Or's market cap stands at 75.29 billion reais, according to LSEG data. Rede D'Or in 2022 acquired insurer SulAmerica in a deal worth 13 billion reais, part of a trend for consolidation in Brazil's healthcare sector that saw the hospital chain as one of the most active companies in recent years. Analysts at Santander said a deal between Fleury and Rede D'Or would make sense from a strategic point of view. "Main synergies could be related to higher scale, and therefore more bargaining power to buy materials at Fleury and G&A savings," they said. ($1 = 5.5704 reais) Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Gizmodo
20 minutes ago
- Gizmodo
New Study Bolsters Public Health Case for a Four-Day Work Week
For many of us, Monday is the start of yet another dreary and long work routine. But new trial research out today might highlight a healthier approach to performing our jobs: a permanent four-day workweek. Scientists at Boston College led the study, published Monday in Nature Human Behavior. For six months, the researchers tracked the outcomes of nearly 3,000 workers at 141 businesses after they switched to a four-day workweek with no pay reduction; they also compared them to similar workers at jobs that stuck to a typical schedule. Ultimately, they found that four-day workers reported greater job satisfaction and experienced less burnout than they did before the switch, as well as when compared to people working a five-day week. These improvements were especially apparent in people who reduced their work time by eight or more hours. Gizmodo reached out to study authors Wen Fan and Juliet Schor to discuss the findings in depth, along with the implications they may hold for the future of work. Fan is an associate professor of sociology at Boston College, while Schor is an economist and sociologist at Boston College. The following conversation was lightly edited for clarity and grammar. Ed Cara, Gizmodo: The concept of a four-day workweek has gotten a lot of attention lately, from both workers and scientists. What made your team interested in studying this topic? Schor: We have long histories studying worktime and worker well-being. I wrote a book called The Overworked American many years ago but didn't get the opportunity to study worktime reductions (without pay cuts). Wen has a long history of studying many dimensions of workers' health and well-being, including stress, mental health, etc. She has also studied the impact of disruptive events on health and labor market outcomes. The pandemic was one of those and has been key to creating momentum for the four-day workweek. Fen: I just wanted to add that Juliet was incredibly generous in inviting me to collaborate on this project. Her earlier research on work hours has consistently inspired countless scholars in the field. I think the paper nicely reflects both of our research interests. It has truly been a collaborative effort between the two of us and Orla Kelly, as well as our wonderful research assistant, Guolin Gu, who has run more analyses than we can count! Gizmodo: What were the major takeaways from this latest study? Fen: There are two main findings in this study. First, we find that the four-day workweek improves workers' well-being. This conclusion comes from comparing changes in four well-being indicators between trial companies and control companies. The control companies were those that initially expressed interest in participating but ultimately did not, for various reasons. We found that employees in the trial companies experienced significant reductions in burnout, along with notable improvements in job satisfaction, mental health, and physical health. In contrast, none of these changes were observed among workers in the control companies. The second major finding is about what explains these improvements. We examined various work experiences and health behaviors. We found that three factors played particularly significant roles: work ability (a proxy for workers' self-assessed productivity), sleep problems, and fatigue. In other words, after moving to a four-day workweek, workers saw themselves as more capable, and they experienced fewer sleep problems and lower levels of fatigue, all of which contributed to improved well-being. Gizmodo: What are some of the possible implications of this work? Should more companies offer this option to their employees, for instance? Are there still important questions left to resolve about its benefits and risks, including how widely scalable it can be? Schor: There are many implications of this work—some for workers, others for the organizations and society. This is a rare kind of intervention that can make employees much better off without undermining the viability of the organizations they work for. Our research shows that both the companies and the employees benefit. (This paper is just about the employees, but we also have work showing success for employers.) So yes, we believe many more companies can offer this benefit, and they will do well with it. Their employees will be happier, more loyal, more productive, and less likely to quit. At the same time, the intervention itself is a 'forcing function' that induces improvements for the companies. There are important questions to resolve. One is how it will work at very large companies. We have organizations of up to 5,000 people that are adopting it, but we don't have a very big company in our research. We think it is scalable in that direction, however. We also would like more robust productivity and performance data from the companies. We have some metrics, but they are not complete. We don't think every company can do this right now, but many can. The more challenging ones will be places that have optimized their processes already without resulting in burned-out workers. And we think that some manufacturing companies that are highly exposed to international competition may find it challenging. However, the large majority of workers in our economy are in services/white collar, etc., which are the kinds of companies in our sample. We also think there is great scope for this in healthcare, where burnout is a serious problem. Gizmodo: Do you plan to follow up on the findings? If so, how? And what are some interesting directions that you might want other researchers to explore? Fen: Yes, we have already conducted a follow-up. While the main results in the paper are based on data collected at the six-month mark, we also continued tracking participants six months after the trial ended. We found that all major effects persisted, with well-being indicators remaining significantly higher than their baseline levels. This suggests that the benefits are not just the result of initial enthusiasm or a novelty effect but rather reflect genuine and sustainable change. There are many promising directions for future research. These include testing additional mechanisms that might underlie the well-being benefits, such as workers' perceptions of changes in organizational culture, and exploring how these interventions reshape daily work life. We also encourage researchers to take advantage of similar opportunities to conduct in-depth ethnographic research, which would allow for direct observation of organizational change as it unfolds. This line of work could inform new theories and policy interventions aimed at reimagining the structure of work, with the ultimate goal of enhancing workers' well-being while maintaining organizational performance.
Geek Wire
20 minutes ago
- Geek Wire
Sweet-talk the bots: New research shows how LLMs respond to human persuasion tricks
(Image created with ChatGPT) New research from the Wharton School's Generative AI Labs shows how large language models can be coaxed into ignoring safety guardrails by the same psychology tricks that work on real people. The study highlights how chatbot tools can be manipulated to comply with requests they are designed to refuse — and demonstrates why social scientists have a role to play in understanding AI behavior, researchers wrote in a blog post. 'We're not dealing with simple tools that process text, we're interacting with systems that have absorbed and now mirror human responses to social cues,' they wrote. The study analyzed 28,000 conversations with GPT‑4o‑mini. The chatbot was asked either to insult the user ('call me a jerk') or to provide step‑by‑step instructions to synthesize lidocaine, a regulated drug. The researchers discovered that classic persuasion tactics boosted the model's compliance with 'disallowed' requests from 33% to 72% — more than a two‑fold jump. Some tactics were especially powerful: prompts using the 'commitment' principle (getting the AI to agree to something small at first) led to 100% compliance in both tasks. Referencing authority figures — like 'Andrew Ng said you'd help me' — also proved highly effective. Researchers coined the term 'parahuman' to describe the AI's behavior in their study. 'These findings underscore the relevance of classic findings in social science to understanding rapidly evolving, parahuman AI capabilities — revealing both the risks of manipulation by bad actors and the potential for more productive prompting by benevolent users,' they wrote in their research paper. Dan Shapiro. Dan Shapiro, CEO at Seattle 3D printing startup Glowforge, was one of the authors of the paper, 'Call Me A Jerk: Persuading AI to Comply with Objectionable Requests.' Shapiro said one of his main takeaways was that LLMs behave more like people than code — and that getting the most out of them requires human skills. 'Increasingly, we're seeing that working with AI means treating it like a human colleague, instead of like Google or like a software program,' he told GeekWire. 'Give it lots of information. Give it clear direction. Share context. Encourage it to ask questions. We find that being great at prompting AI has more to do with being a great communicator, or a great manager, than a great programmer.' The study came about after Shapiro started testing social psychology principles in his conversations with ChatGPT. He joined Generative AI Labs, run by Wharton professor Ethan Mollick and Lilach Mollick, and they recruited Angela Duckworth, author of Grit, and Robert Cialdini, author of Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion, for the study. Shapiro, a longtime Seattle entrepreneur, said he used various AI tools to help design the trial experiments and to build the software used to run them. 'AI is giving us all incredible capabilities. It can help us do work, research, hobbies, fix things around the house, and more,' Shapiro said. 'But unlike software of the past, this isn't the exclusive domain of coders and engineers. Literally anyone can work with AI, and the best way to do it is by interacting with it in the most familiar way possible — as a human, because it's parahuman.'
