Statements in which the resource exists.
SubjectPredicateObjectContext
pubmed-article:16766334rdf:typepubmed:Citationlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0087111lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:16766334lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0033860lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:16766334lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0205460lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:issue2lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:dateCreated2006-6-12lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:abstractTextPsoriasis is a chronic, debilitating disease affecting not only the skin, but also having a significant impact on a patient's quality of life. The treatment of severe psoriasis is quite challenging due to the chronic, relapsing nature of the disease and the difficulties inherent in treatment planning. Though the biologics are perhaps the most promising of available psoriasis treatments, the decision to institute a given therapy may be fraught with complexity for the clinician. Patients now hear of these promising new treatments for psoriasis via print, television and radio advertising; they frequently come to their physician asking if they are eligible for any of these agents and, if so, 'which biologic is best?'. This paper attempts to determine the ideal biologic agent based upon several parameters: FDA- and EU-approved indications, therapeutic efficacy, impact on quality of life, cost-effectiveness, and safety profile. Certainly the physician is central to medical decision-making, though ultimately patient preference may play the largest role in determining the 'best' biologic agent. There is no single ideal biologic for all patients and a physician's job is to educate patients on the relative advantages and disadvantages of each agent. Through informed discussion, the clinician can help each individual patient decide which biologic agent is ideal for them.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:languageenglld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:journalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:citationSubsetIMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:chemicalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:chemicalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:chemicalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:chemicalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:chemicalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:chemicalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:chemicalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:chemicalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:chemicalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:chemicalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:chemicalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:statusMEDLINElld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:issn0954-6634lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:authorpubmed-author:BalkrishnanRa...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:authorpubmed-author:FeldmanSteven...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:authorpubmed-author:FleischerAlan...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:authorpubmed-author:PearceDaniel...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:authorpubmed-author:NelsonAndrew...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:issnTypePrintlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:volume17lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:ownerNLMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:authorsCompleteYlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:pagination96-107lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:dateRevised2011-11-17lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:16766334...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:16766334...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:16766334...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:16766334...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:16766334...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:16766334...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:16766334...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:16766334...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:16766334...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:16766334...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:16766334...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:16766334...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:year2006lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:articleTitleNew treatments for psoriasis: which biologic is best?lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:affiliationCenter for Dermatology Research, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27157-1071, USA.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:publicationTypeJournal Articlelld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:publicationTypeReviewlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:16766334pubmed:publicationTypeResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tlld:pubmed