ReviewRheumatology advances in practice2025
Therapeutic efficacy of molecular-targeted drugs for enthesitis in patients with PsA: a network meta-analysis.
Review in Rheumatology advances in practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Enthesitis plays a key role in the pathogenesis of PsA. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of molecular-targeted therapies for enthesitis in patients with PsA. Methods: In this network meta-analysis (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42024590257), studies published up to April 2025 were searched in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus and ClinicalTrials.gov. Only randomized controlled trials assessing molecular-targeted therapies for enthesitis in PsA were included. The primary outcomes were enthesitis resolution rates and Leeds enthesitis index score reductions at 12 and 24 weeks. A random-effects model was employed to calculate risk differences (RDs) or standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), analysing both drug classes and individual agents. Results: Out of 5762 screened studies, 28 randomized controlled trials were included, encompassing 10 383 patients with PsA presenting with enthesitis. Therapies included TNF-alpha inhibitors, Janus kinase inhibitors, IL-17/IL-17 receptor inhibitors, IL-23 inhibitors and a cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen-4 immunoglobulin. At 24 weeks, upadacitinib significantly improved the enthesitis resolution rate [RD: 11.24 (95% CI: 4.26 to 18.23)] and reduced the Leeds enthesitis index scores [SMD: -0.72 (95% CI: -1.36 to -0.09)] compared with adalimumab; meanwhile, other Janus kinase inhibitors did not. Certolizumab also reduced the Leeds enthesitis index scores [SMD: -0.92 (95% CI: -1.72 to -0.13)]. Conclusion: This network meta-analysis identified the more therapeutic efficacy of upadacitinib and certolizumab for enthesitis in patients with PsA than those of other molecular-targeted drugs. Notably, efficacy varied among molecular-targeted therapies, even within drug classes, underscoring the need for tailored therapeutic strategies.
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.