ArticleZeitschrift fur Rheumatologie2020
Comparative efficacy and safety of 15 and 30 mg upadacitinib administered to patients with active rheumatoid arthritis: a Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Article in Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Safety of Upadacitinib in Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases: Systematic Literature Review of Indirect and Direct Treatment Comparisons of Randomized Controlled Trials.Advances in therapy · 2024Pooled it
- Review
- JAK Inhibitors and Modulation of B Cell Immune Responses in Rheumatoid Arthritis.Frontiers in medicine · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesWe assessed the relative efficacy and safety of once-daily administration of 15 and 30 mg upadacitinib (a JAK1-selective inhibitor) in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA).
methodsWe conducted a Bayesian network meta-analysis to combine the direct and indirect evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examined the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib in patients with active RA.
resultsFive RCTs involving 4381 patients met the inclusion criteria. There were 15 pairwise comparisons, including eight direct comparisons and six interventions. The ACR20 response rate was significantly higher in the upadacitinib 15 and 30 mg + MTX (methotrexate) groups than in the MTX group (OR: 4.98, 95% CrI: 2.66-10.10; OR: 4.73, 95% CrI: 2.25-10.98). Adalimumab 40 mg + MTX, upadacitinib 30 mg, and upadacitinib 15 mg groups showed a significantly higher ACR20 response rate than did the MTX group. Ranking probability based on the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) indicated that upadacitinib 15 mg + MTX was likely to achieve the best ACR20 response rate (SUCRA = 0.838), followed by upadacitinib 30 mg + MTX, adalimumab 40 mg + MTX, upadacitinib 30 mg, upadacitinib 15 mg, and MTX (SUCRA = 0.784, 0.495, 0.471, 0.404, and 0.008, respectively). The safety based on the number of serious adverse events (SAEs) did not differ significantly among the six interventions.
conclusionsUpadacitinib 15 and 30 mg administration once daily in combination with MTX was the most efficacious intervention for active RA, with no significant risk for SAEs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30725185What 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.