Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34931610›Full record

ArticleClinical nephrology2022

Comparative efficacy of ravulizumab and eculizumab in the treatment of atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome: An indirect comparison using clinical trial data.

Ioannis Tomazos, Anthony J Hatswell, Spero Cataland, Peter Chen, Nick Freemantle, Åsa Lommele, Kevin Deighton, Emma Knowles, Neil S Sheerin, Eric Rondeau

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical nephrology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Observational
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

10 authors.

Ioannis Tomazos
Anthony J Hatswell
Spero Cataland
Peter Chen
Nick Freemantle
Åsa Lommele
Kevin Deighton
Emma Knowles
Neil S Sheerin
Eric Rondeau

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ravulizumab and eculizumab are approved terminal complement inhibitor treatments for atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome (aHUS). Ravulizumab was engineered from eculizumab to have an increased half-life allowing for reduced dosing frequency (8-weekly vs. 2-weekly). To account for differences in respective clinical trials, a validated balancing technique was used to enable an indirect comparison of ravulizumab and eculizumab treatment efficacy in aHUS. Patient-level data from four eculizumab clinical trials were available for pooling and comparison with data from two ravulizumab trials. In the primary analysis, adult native kidney data were compared. Propensity scores were calculated from baseline characteristics (dialysis status, estimated glomerular filtration rate, platelet count, serum lactate dehydrogenase). Stabilized inverse probability weighting was used to balance groups. Changes in outcomes from baseline to 26 weeks were compared between treatment groups. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of findings. Overall, 85 patients (46 ravulizumab, 39 eculizumab) were included in the primary analysis. Demographic and clinical characteristics were well balanced after weighting at baseline. At 26 weeks, clinical outcomes (including renal function, hematological markers, and dialysis prevalence), and fatigue and quality of life measures were improved with eculizumab and ravulizumab treatment. No differences between treatment groups reached statistical significance, although confidence intervals were wide. Sensitivity and subgroup analysis results were consistent with those of the primary analysis. Using appropriate methodology for indirect comparison of studies, no differences in outcomes were seen between ravulizumab and eculizumab, although, owing to small sample sizes, confidence intervals were wide.

Indexed as

Atypical Hemolytic Uremic SyndromeAdultAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedFemaleHumansMaleQuality of LifeAntibodies, Monoclonal, Humanizedeculizumabravulizumab

Identifiers

PMID34931610
PMCPMC9040196
OpenAlexW3202358903

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.