ArticleRheumatology and therapy2024
Comparative Effectiveness of Bimekizumab and Guselkumab in Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis at 52 Weeks Assessed Using a Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison.
Article in Rheumatology and therapy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 5 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
A Phase 3, Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Study Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Guselkumab Administered Subcutaneously in Subjects With Active Psoriatic Arthritis
Phase 3b, Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Guselkumab Administered Subcutaneously in Participants With Active Psoriatic Arthritis and an Inadequate Response to Anti-Tumor Necrosis Factor Alpha (Anti-TNFα) Therapy
A Phase 3, Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Active Reference (Adalimumab) Study Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Bimekizumab in the Treatment of Subjects With Active Psoriatic Arthritis
A Multicenter, Phase 3, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Bimekizumab in the Treatment of Subjects With Active Psoriatic Arthritis
A Multicenter, Open-Label Extension Study to Assess the Long-Term Safety, Tolerability, and Efficacy of Bimekizumab in the Treatment of Subjects With Active Psoriatic Arthritis
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost-per-Responder Analysis of Bimekizumab (IL-17A/F Inhibitor) Against IL-Inhibitors for Psoriatic Arthritis in Spain, Based on Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparisons.Rheumatology and therapy · 2026Article
- Dual anti-cytokine biologic and/or targeted synthetic therapy combination in spondyloarthritis: a narrative review. Are we missing the opportunity for higher remission rates?Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Comparative Effectiveness of Bimekizumab and Risankizumab in Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis at 52 Weeks Assessed Using a Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison.Rheumatology and therapy · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 8 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMatching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAIC) were used to assess the relative efficacy of bimekizumab 160 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W) compared to guselkumab 100 mg Q4W or every 8 weeks (Q8W) at 48/52 weeks in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) who were biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug-naïve (bDMARD-naïve) or with previous inadequate response or intolerance to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi-IR).
methodsRelevant trials were identified as part of a systematic literature review. For patients who were bDMARD-naïve, individual patient data (IPD) from BE OPTIMAL (N = 431) was matched to summary data from DISCOVER-2 (Q4W, n = 245; Q8W, n = 248). For patients who were TNFi-IR, IPD from BE COMPLETE (n = 267) and summary data from COSMOS (Q8W, N = 189). Trial populations were re-weighted using propensity scores. Unanchored comparisons of recalculated bimekizumab and guselkumab 48- or 52-week non-responder imputation outcomes for 20/50/70% improvement in American College of Rheumatology score (ACR20/50/70) and minimal disease activity (MDA) index were analyzed.
resultsIn patients who were bDMARD-naïve, bimekizumab was associated with a greater likelihood of ACR50 (odds ratio [95% confidence interval] 1.62 [1.07, 2.44]; p = 0.021), ACR70 (2.20 [1.43, 3.38]; p < 0.001), and MDA (1.82 [1.20, 2.76]; p = 0.005) compared to guselkumab Q4W at week 52. Bimekizumab also had a greater likelihood of ACR70 response (2.08 [1.34, 3.22]; p = 0.001) and MDA (2.07 [1.35, 3.17]; p < 0.001) compared to guselkumab Q8W at week 52. In patients who were TNFi-IR, bimekizumab had a greater likelihood in achieving all evaluated outcomes compared to guselkumab Q8W at week 48/52 (ACR20, 1.77 [1.15, 2.72]; p = 0.010; ACR50, 1.56 [1.03, 2.36]; p = 0.037; ACR70, 1.66 [1.05, 2.61]; p = 0.028; and MDA, 1.95 [1.27, 3.02]; p = 0.003).
conclusionsAccording to MAICs, bimekizumab demonstrated greater or comparable efficacy on ACR50/70 and MDA outcomes than guselkumab in patients with PsA who were bDMARD-naïve and TNFi-IR at week 48/52. Bimekizumab had a more favorable likelihood than guselkumab in achieving more stringent treatment outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATIONS: NCT03895203, NCT03896581, NCT04009499, NCT03158285, NCT03796858.
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.