SynthesisClinical rheumatology2025
A systematic review and network meta-analysis comparing the efficacy and safety of deucravacitinib versus selected treatments for moderate to severe plaque psoriasis.
Synthesis in Clinical rheumatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Successful treatment of lupus erythematosus tumidus (LET) with deucravacitinib in a patient with concomitant plaque psoriasis].Dermatologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- Emerging Targets in Psoriatic Arthritis: Dual IL-17A/F and Selective TYK2 Inhibition in a Clinical Perspective.Mediterranean journal of rheumatology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo assess deucravacitinib's efficacy and safety against selected treatments for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis via network meta-analysis.
methodsRelevant studies were selected via a systematic literature search in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases. To assess the ORs with corresponding 95% CIs for outcomes including PASI 75, PASI 90, sPGA 0/1, and treatment discontinuation due to adverse events over the 10-16-week timeframe, a network meta-analysis was performed utilizing R software. Treatment efficacy and safety were comparatively ranked by calculating the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA).
resultsThis study included 66 trials of 27,074 patients. All interventions outperformed placebo in short-term outcomes. Infliximab ranked the highest for achieving PASI 75 (OR, 0.01; 95% CI, 0.00 to 0.01, moderate-to-high-quality evidence). Bimekizumab ranked the highest for achieving PASI 90 (OR, 0.00; 95% CI, 0.00 to 0.01, moderate-to-high-quality evidence). Tildrakizumab ranked the highest for achieving sPGA 0/1 (OR, 0.01; 95% CI, 0.00 to 0.05, low-to-high-quality evidence). Brodalumab had the highest risk of discontinuation due to adverse events (OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.36 to 5.04, moderate-to-high-quality evidence).
conclusionsAccumulating research, albeit of differing robustness, suggests that bimekizumab could potentially offer superior efficacy compared to other therapies in attaining both the PASI 75 and PASI 90 response thresholds in psoriasis treatment. Tildrakizumab appears to have achieved the highest proportion of participants reaching a static Physician's Global Assessment (sPGA) score of clear or almost clear (sPGA 0/1). Deucravacitinib has demonstrated moderate efficacy and tolerability; however, additional head-to-head comparative trials are warranted to substantiate its effects due to the paucity of existing studies. Key Points • The NMA of 66 RCTs reveals that infliximab, bimekizumab, and tildrakizumab are superior in achieving PASI 75, PASI 90, and sPGA 0/1, respectively, in moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis, underscoring their therapeutic significance. • Deucravacitinib, an oral TYK2 inhibitor, outperforms placebo and apremilast in efficacy for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. Its once-daily dosing may enhance adherence, presenting a promising oral therapy. • The study's strengths are its assessment of deucravacitinib's short-term effects, use of high-quality RCTs, and analytical rigor. Limitations involve varying trial durations and reporting biases. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to ensure robust findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40846809What 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.