Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26852316›Full record

SynthesisClinical rheumatology2016

Indirect comparisons of the efficacy of subsequent biological agents in patients with psoriatic arthritis with an inadequate response to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors: a meta-analysis.

Patompong Ungprasert, Charat Thongprayoon, John M Davis

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical rheumatology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Tumor necrosis factor inhibitors in psoriatic arthritis.Expert review of clinical pharmacology · 2017
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Apremilast in the treatment of psoriatic arthritis: a perspective review.Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease · 2017
    Review
  12. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Patompong UngprasertDivision of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, 200 First street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA. p.ungprasert@gmail.com.
Charat ThongprayoonDivision of Nephrology and Hypertension, Department of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.
John M DavisDivision of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, 200 First street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.
Mayo Clinic · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Significant portion of patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) could not tolerate or do not have a satisfactory response to either non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), non-biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs), or even TNF inhibitors. Non-TNF inhibitor biologic agents have emerged as second-line therapy in such situation. However, the comparative efficacy of these agents remains unknown as head-to-head randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are not available. RCTs examining the efficacy of non-TNF inhibitor biologic agents in patients with PsA who experienced inadequate response or intolerance of TNF inhibitors were identified. If more than one RCT was available for a given biologic agent, the pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95 % confidence interval (CI) of achieving 20 % improvement according to American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR20) response across trials were calculated. The pooled OR for each biologic agent was then compared using the indirect comparison technique. Five RCTs of four non-TNF inhibitor biologic agents, including abatacept, secukinumab, ustekinumab, and apremilast, with 675 participants were identified and included in the data analyses. We found no significant difference in any comparisons, with the p values ranging from 0.14 to 0.98. Our study demonstrates that the likelihood of achieving the ACR20 response in patients with TNF inhibitor experience is not significantly different between the four non-TNF biologic agents. However, the interpretation of this analysis is limited by the small sample sizes. Head-to-head comparisons are still required to confirm the comparative efficacy.

Indexed as

AbataceptAdalimumabAntibodies, MonoclonalAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAnti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-SteroidalAntirheumatic AgentsArthritis, PsoriaticBiological FactorsEtanerceptHumansInfliximabRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTumor Necrosis Factor-alphaAbataceptAdalimumabAntibodies, MonoclonalAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAnti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-SteroidalAntirheumatic AgentsBiological FactorsEtanerceptgolimumabInfliximabsecukinumabTumor Necrosis Factor-alphaBiologic agentsMeta-analysisPsoriatic arthritisSystematic reviewTNF inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID26852316
OpenAlexW2290423455

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.