ArticlePharmaceutics2024
Prescribing Pattern and Safety Profile of Biological Agents for Psoriasis in Real-World Practice: A Four-Year Calabrian Pharmacovigilance Analysis.
Article in Pharmaceutics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
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.
- Article
- Real‑world safety and efficacy of biological agents in inflammatory bowel disease: a one-year post-marketing pharmacovigilance observational study in the Calabria region.Pharmacological reports : PR · 2025Observational
- Biosimilars for the Treatment of Moderate to Severe Chronic Plaque Psoriasis.Psoriasis (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe treatment of psoriasis has made considerable progress with biologicals, including tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, and recently, monoclonal antibodies inhibiting directly interleukin (IL) 17, IL-23, or both IL-12/23. Newer biologicals are directed to the interleukin pathway and appear to improve complete or near-complete clearance. The newer biologicals have also been shown to have an excellent safety profile. However, despite experience with patients having confirmed the results obtained in clinical trials, there are still few data on using the newer biologicals.
methodsThe present active study aimed to prospectively evaluate safety profiles and persistence of some biologicals in a multicenter pharmacovigilance study, that enrolled 733 patients treated with a biologic drug in five Calabrian hospital units. Informative and treatment persistence evaluations with predictors for suspension and occurrence of adverse events (AEs) were executed. In particular, reasons for treatment discontinuation in our program take account of primary/secondary failure or development of an AE.
resultsAEs occurred in 187/733 patients and serious AEs (SAEs) were identified in 5/733 patients. An number of 182/733 patients showed a primary/secondary inefficacy. The AEs and SAEs were described with adalimumab, infliximab, and etanercept but not with abatacept, brodalumab, tildrakizumab, golinumab, ixekizumab, guselkumab, risankizumab, secukinumab, and ustekinumab.
conclusionsOur analysis, although limited by a small sample size and a short-term follow-up period, offers suitable data on commonly used biological agents and their safety, interruption rate, and the attendance of SAEs. Real-world studies should be carried out to evaluate other safety interests.
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.