SynthesisMedicine2016
Comparative Effectiveness of Biologic Therapy Regimens for Ankylosing Spondylitis: A Systematic Review and a Network Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- Guideline
- Efficacy and safety of IL-17 inhibitors for the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Arthritis research & therapy · 2020Pooled it
- [Long version on the S3 guidelines for axial spondyloarthritis including Bechterew's disease and early forms, Update 2019 : Evidence-based guidelines of the German Society for Rheumatology (DGRh) and participating medical scientific specialist societies and other organizations].Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie · 2019Guideline
- Comparative Efficacy of Tumor Necrosis Factor-α Inhibitors in Ankylosing Spondylitis: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Metaanalysis.The Journal of rheumatology · 2018Pooled it
- Durability of cervical disc arthroplasties and its influence factors: A systematic review and a network meta-analysis.Medicine · 2017Pooled it
- Evaluation of the performance of biological drugs in the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis: cohort study, Minas Gerais, 2018-2023.Epidemiologia e servicos de saude : revista do Sistema Unico de Saude do Brasil · 2025Article
- Modelling Treatment Sequences in Immunology: Optimizing Patient Outcomes.Advances in therapy · 2024Article
- Review
- Optimal Biologic Drugs for the Treatment of Ankylosing Spondylitis: Results from a Network Meta-Analysis and Network Metaregression.BioMed research international · 2022Article
- Observational
- Propensity score matching/reweighting analysis comparing intravenous golimumab to infliximab for ankylosing spondylitis using data from the GO-ALIVE and ASSERT trials.Clinical rheumatology · 2020Article
- A Review of Recent Advances Using Tocilizumab in the Treatment of Rheumatic Diseases.Rheumatology and therapy · 2018Review
- Turkish League Against Rheumatism Consensus Report: Recommendations For Management of Axial Spondyloarthritis.Archives of rheumatology · 2018Article
- Serum IL-6 correlates with axial mobility index (Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Metrology Index) in Brazilian patients with ankylosing spondylitis.Open access rheumatology : research and reviews · 2018Article
- Pain in ankylosing spondylitis: a neuro-immune collaboration.Nature reviews. Rheumatology · 2017Review
- Role and Function of AInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2017Article
- Room for more IL-6 blockade? Sarilumab for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis.Expert opinion on biological therapy · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To establish the comparative effectiveness of all available biologic therapy regimens for ankylosing spondylitis, we performed a systematic review and a Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. PubMed, Medline, Embase, Cochrane library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from the inception of each database to June 2015. Systematic review and network meta-analysis was reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension Statement for Reporting of Systematic Reviews Incorporating Network Meta-analyses. The primary outcome was 20% improvement of Assessments in SpondyloArthritis International Society Response Criteria (ASAS20) at Week 12 or 14; secondary outcomes were ASAS40, ASAS5/6, ASAS partial remission and 50% improvement in baseline Bath ankylosing spondylitis (AS) disease activity index. We reported relative risks and 95% confidence intervals from direct meta-analysis and 95% credible intervals from Bayesian network meta-analysis, and ranked the treatment for outcomes. We also used Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation criteria to appraise quality of evidence. Fourteen RCTs comprising 2672 active AS patients were included in the network meta-analysis. Most biologic therapy regimens were more effective than placebo regarding all the outcomes assessed, except for secukinumab and tocilizumab. No differences between biologic therapies in the treatment of AS could be found, except for the finding that infliximab 5 mg was superior to tocilizumab. Infliximab 5 mg/kg had the highest probability of being ranked the best for achieving ASAS20, whereas notably, secukinumab had the highest probability of being ranked the second best. Our study suggests that no differences between biologic therapies in the treatment of AS could be found except that infliximab 5 mg was superior to tocilizumab. Infliximab 5 mg/kg seems to be the better biologic therapy regimen for AS. Secukinumab appears promising, though additional data is warranted. Nevertheless, these interpretations should be accepted very cautiously.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.