ReviewDermatology and therapy2025
Biologics for the Treatment of Moderate-to-Severe Plaque Psoriasis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.
Review in Dermatology and therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparative efficacy and safety of IL-23 p19 monoclonal antibodies for plaque psoriasis: a bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Pooled it
- Real-World Long-Term Effectiveness and Safety of Secukinumab in Psoriasis: Up to 7 Years of Evidence from the Italian Landscape Psoriasis (IL PSO) Multicenter Retrospective Study.Dermatology and therapy · 2026Article
- Drug Stratification Based on Real-World Evidence in Psoriasis: A Narrative Review.Dermatology and therapy · 2026Review
- Predictive Factors of Early Super-Response to Biologic Agents in Psoriasis: Insights from Real-World Evidence.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionModerate-to-severe plaque psoriasis is a chronic disease impacting quality of life (QoL). This network meta-analysis (NMA) compared efficacy and safety of all biologics approved for the treatment of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis to better inform providers on mid-term outcomes, with a focus on the interleukin-23 p19 inhibitor tildrakizumab.
methodsMEDLINE®, Embase, and CENTRAL were searched for randomized clinical trials (RCT) from inception through January 2024. RCTs comparing biologics against placebo or each other reporting Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI), Physician Global Assessment (PGA) 0/1, or Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) 0/1 responses and safety outcomes (adverse events [AEs] or serious AEs [SAEs]) were sought. Bayesian NMAs were performed at week 28 as the primary time point of interest. Analyses were also performed at weeks 12 and 16. Findings were expressed as risk ratios (RR; efficacy outcomes), risk differences (RD; safety outcomes), and numbers needed to treat (NNT) with 95% credible intervals.
resultsOf 7418 publications screened, 187 describing 124 RCTs of 12 biologics were included in the systematic literature review, and 103 RCTs were included for NMA. All treatments demonstrated improved efficacy and QoL vs. placebo at week 28. Tildrakizumab efficacy at week 28 was comparable to risankizumab and guselkumab, respectively, for PASI 75 (RR 8.74 vs. 8.92 and 8.91), PASI 90 (RR 14.09 vs. 14.81 and 14.77), and PGA 0/1 (RR 9.34 vs. 10.29 and 10.23). No biologics exhibited an increased risk of SAEs vs. placebo; tildrakizumab exhibited no increased risk vs. placebo for AEs.
conclusionsThe investigated biologics demonstrated improved efficacy and QoL relative to placebo at week 28, with no increased risk of SAEs vs. placebo through week 16. At week 28, efficacy of tildrakizumab, risankizumab, and guselkumab was comparable. Limitations include lack of placebo comparators after week 12 or 16, which could affect results.
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.