SynthesisZeitschrift fur Rheumatologie2026
Indirect comparative efficacy and safety of belimumab vs. anifrolumab in systemic lupus erythematosus and lupus nephritis: a meta-analysis of randomized trials.
Synthesis in Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Methodological concerns and data discrepancies in the indirect treatment comparison of belimumab and anifrolumab.Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveBelimumab and anifrolumab are two biologic therapies currently employed in the management of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Belimumab is approved for both SLE and lupus nephritis (LN), whereas anifrolumab is not currently approved for LN and has only been evaluated for LN in one published phase II trial. Direct head-to-head comparative data are lacking. This meta-analysis aims to indirectly compare the efficacy and safety of belimumab and anifrolumab using evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
methodsWe performed a comprehensive search of MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Indirect comparative analyses were conducted using odds ratios (ORs) and hazard ratios (HRs) derived from clinical trial data comparing both belimumab and anifrolumab with placebo for SLE and LN. Primary endpoints included SRI‑4 response, SELENA-SLEDAI ≥ 4 reduction, corticosteroid dose reduction, incidence of severe flares, normalization of anti-dsDNA, and normalization of C3/C4 in SLE as well as complete renal response (CRR), renal event-free survival, and immunologic biomarkers in LN. Safety was evaluated based on the incidence of herpes zoster, serious infections, and mortality.
resultsSeven RCTs comprising 4332 patients treated with either belimumab or anifrolumab for SLE or LN were included in this meta-analysis. For SLE, belimumab demonstrated superior SRI‑4 response rates (OR = 1.99, 95% CI: 1.25-3.16) relative to anifrolumab, whereas anifrolumab yielded greater benefit in steroid tapering (OR = 0.31, 95% CI: 0.19-0.51) and immunologic normalization (anti-dsDNA: OR = 0.69, 95% CI: 0.43-1.10; C3/C4: OR = 0.69, 95% CI: 0.42-1.13). In LN, both agents improved CRR rates compared to placebo; however, indirect comparisons between the two agents were not definitive due to wide confidence intervals (CRR: OR = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.22-3.10). Safety profiles were similar in terms of serious infections and mortality, although anifrolumab was linked to higher rates of herpes zoster (7.2% vs. 3.2-4.6% for belimumab).
conclusionBelimumab confers greater benefit in terms of SRI‑4 response for SLE, while anifrolumab is more effective for corticosteroid tapering and immunologic parameter normalization. In LN, the comparative efficacy remains uncertain. Both agents exhibit similar safety profiles, but anifrolumab is associated with an increased risk of herpes zoster. Differences in study design, inclusion criteria, and assessment protocols among included trials may limit direct comparability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41342907What 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.