Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37801281›Full record

ArticleDermatology and therapy2023

Short-, Mid-, and Long-Term Efficacy of Deucravacitinib Versus Biologics and Nonbiologics for Plaque Psoriasis: A Network Meta-Analysis.

April W Armstrong, Richard B Warren, Yichen Zhong, Joe Zhuo, Allie Cichewicz, Ananth Kadambi, Daniela Junqueira, Tracy Westley, Renata Kisa, Carolin Daamen and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Dermatology and therapy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
5.3field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

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

11 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

April W ArmstrongUniversity of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA. aprilarmstrong@post.harvard.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0064-8707
Richard B WarrenDermatology Centre, Northern Care Alliance NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2918-6481
Yichen ZhongBristol Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ, USA.
Joe ZhuoBristol Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ, USA.
Allie CichewiczEvidera, a part of Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8528-9901
Ananth KadambiEvidera, a part of Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5669-4887
Daniela JunqueiraEvidera, a part of Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3261-4811
Tracy WestleyEvidera, a part of Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA.
Renata KisaBristol Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ, USA.
Carolin DaamenBristol Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ, USA.
Matthias AugustinInstitute for Health Services Research in Dermatology and Nursing, University Medical Center, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4026-8728
Bristol-Myers Squibb (United States) · USThermo Fisher Scientific (United States) · USAPLA Health · USManchester Academic Health Science Centre · GBUniversität Hamburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionDeucravacitinib, a newly approved oral medication for the treatment of patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis, demonstrated efficacy versus apremilast and placebo in two phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs). A systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) indirectly compared deucravacitinib with other relevant systemic biologic/nonbiologic treatments.

methodsOnline databases were searched for RCTs published through October 2021. Eligible studies were head-to-head comparisons between systemic therapies and/or placebo reporting 50%, 75%, 90%, or 100% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) from baseline in adults with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. Comparisons included tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, interleukin (IL)-17, IL-23, and IL 12/23 inhibitors, and systemic nonbiologics. A multinomial Bayesian NMA was used to derive estimates of the relative efficacy of deucravacitinib and other systemic therapies. Response probabilities for each treatment and corresponding 95% credible intervals (CrIs) for achieving a PASI response were calculated over short-, mid-, and long-term follow-up (weeks 10-16, 24-28, and 44-60).

resultsThe NMA included 47 RCTs. Deucravacitinib showed the highest PASI 75 response rates among nonbiologic systemic therapies across time points. Deucravacitinib PASI 75 response rate (95% CrI) over short-term follow-up was 54.1% (46.5-61.6), within the range of first-generation biologics (etanercept, 39.7% [31.6-48.3]; infliximab, 79.0% [74.0-83.5]). At mid-term follow-up, deucravacitinib PASI 75 increased to 63.3% (58.0-68.4). At long-term follow-up, deucravacitinib PASI 75 was 65.9% (58.0-73.4), comparable to first-generation biologics adalimumab (62.8%; 55.3-69.6) and ustekinumab (68.0%; 64.6-71.5).

conclusionsPatients receiving deucravacitinib were more likely to achieve PASI 75 response versus apremilast and methotrexate across all time points. The long-term PASI 75 response rate for deucravacitinib was similar to those of adalimumab and ustekinumab. The approval of deucravacitinib offers patients the choice of an oral therapy with long-term efficacy similar to that of some biologics.

Indexed as

BiologicsDeucravacitinibIndirect treatment comparisonNetwork meta-analysisNon-biologicsPsoriasis

Identifiers

PMID37801281
PMCPMC10613195
OpenAlexW4387392732

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.