Comparative safety and benefit-risk profile of biologics and oral treatment for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis: A network meta-analysis of clinical trial data
- PMID: 33631216
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jaad.2021.02.057
Comparative safety and benefit-risk profile of biologics and oral treatment for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis: A network meta-analysis of clinical trial data
Abstract
Background: The comparative safety and benefit-risk profiles of moderate-to-severe psoriasis treatment have not been well studied.
Objective: To compare the short-term (12-16 weeks) and long-term (48-56 weeks) safety and benefit-risk profiles of moderate-to-severe psoriasis treatments.
Methods: A systematic literature review of phase II-IV randomized controlled trials of moderate-to-severe psoriasis treatments was conducted (cutoff: July 1, 2020). Any adverse events (AEs), any serious AEs, and AEs leading to treatment discontinuation were compared using Bayesian network meta-analyses (NMAs).
Results: Fifty-two and 7, respectively, randomized controlled trials were included in the short- and long-term NMAs, respectively. In the short-term NMA, the rates of any AEs were the lowest for tildrakizumab (posterior median: 46.0%), certolizumab (46.2%), and etanercept (49.1%). The rates of any serious AE were the lowest for certolizumab (0.8%), risankizumab (1.2%), and etanercept (1.6%). The rates of AEs leading to treatment discontinuation were the lowest for risankizumab (0.5%), tildrakizumab (1.0%), and guselkumab (1.5%). In the long-term NMA, risankizumab had the lowest rates of all 3 outcomes (67.5%, 4.4%, and 1.0%, respectively) and the most favorable benefit-risk profile.
Limitations: The results may not be generalizable to real-world populations.
Conclusions: Anti-interleukin 23 agents were associated with low rates of safety events. Risankizumab had the most favorable benefit-risk profile in the long term.
Keywords: network meta-analysis; outcomes; psoriasis; safety; treatment.
Copyright © 2021 American Academy of Dermatology, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflicts of interest Dr Shear is a paid consultant for AbbVie, Amgen, Lilly, Leo, Bausch Health, Sun Pharma, Janssen, Galderma, Otsuka, UCB, Celgene, Sanofi Genzyme, Novartis, and Pfizer. Drs Joshi, Soliman, and Sinvhal are employees of AbbVie and may own AbbVie stock or stock options. Drs Betts, Wang, and Zhao are employees of Analysis Group, Inc, which received payment from AbbVie Inc for participation in this research. Dr Gisondi has served as a speaker or an advisory board member for AbbVie, Almirall, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Eli-Lilly, Janssen, Leo-pharma, Merck, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Sandoz, and UCB Pharma. Dr Armstrong has served as a research investigator or consultant to Leo, AbbVie, UCB, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Ortho Dermatologics, Sun, Dermavant, BMS, Sanofi, Regeneron, Dermira, and Modmed.
Comment in
-
Letter to the editor concerning the article: "Comparative safety and benefit-risk profile of biologics and oral treatments for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis: A network meta-analysis of clinical trial data".J Am Acad Dermatol. 2021 Nov;85(5):e305-e306. doi: 10.1016/j.jaad.2021.05.068. Epub 2021 Jul 24. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2021. PMID: 34311042 No abstract available.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical