SynthesisMedicine2026
"Efficacy and safety of bimekizumab in moderate-to-severe hidradenitis suppurativa: A systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs".
Synthesis in Medicine, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a chronic inflammatory dermatosis with limited treatment options. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the evidence regarding the use of bimekizumab for treating moderate-to-severe HS, focusing on its clinical efficacy, safety, and outcomes across different clinical parameters.
methodsWe followed the "preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses" (PRISMA) guidelines and performed a systematic search for trials that compared bimekizumab with a placebo in patients with moderate-to-severe HS. A comprehensive search of PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Embase was conducted up to April 2025. The primary outcome of efficacy was the percentage of patients who reached "HS Clinical Response 50" (HiSCR50), with secondary outcomes including HiSCR75, reduction in skin pain, and safety (evaluated by serious adverse events). Two reviewers independently assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane risk-of-bias 2 tool. A fixed-effects model was used for meta-analysis. The study protocol was preregistered in PROSPERO (CRD420251025763).
resultsThree RCTs, encompassing 1218 participants, were included. Bimekizumab made it substantially more probable that the HiSCR50 would be reached (RR: 1.64; 95% CI [1.37-1.97]; P <.00001) than the placebo. Patients who received bimekizumab were also substantially more likely to achieve higher response levels, HiSCR75 (RR: 1.98; 95% CI [1.52-2.59]; P <.00001) and a considerable reduction in skin pain (RR: 2.29; 95% CI [1.54-3.42]; P <.0001). For all measures of efficacy, both the every-two-week and every-four-week dosage schedules were better than the placebo. The occurrence of serious adverse events did not differ significantly between the bimekizumab and placebo groups (RR: 2.34; 95% CI [0.80-6.79]; P = .12).
conclusionThe evidence, although derived from a limited number of trials, demonstrates the superiority of bimekizumab over placebo. For patients with moderate-to-severe HS, bimekizumab showed significantly improved outcomes compared to placebo in terms of enhancing clinical response and lessening skin pain. Although no statistically significant increase in serious adverse events was observed, a potential risk cannot be definitively ruled out given the numerical imbalance.
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.