SynthesisLupus science & medicine2026
Biomarker-stratified efficacy and safety of biologics in systemic lupus erythematosus: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Lupus science & 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveBiologics for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) demonstrate variable treatment responses across trials. We evaluated baseline biomarkers as predictors of response to guide personalised therapy selection.
methodsWe searched PubMed, OVID, Scopus, Cochrane and PsycInfo (January 2000-October 2025) for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating biologics (anti-BAFF, JAK inhibitors, anti-interferon, anti-IL-12/23, BTK inhibitors and T-cell modulators) in adult SLE patients. Primary outcomes included SLE Responder Index-4 response and time-to-flare. We performed random-effects meta-analysis stratified by interferon gene signature (IGS), serologic activity (anti-double-stranded DNA positivity and/or low complement) and high disease activity (Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index (SLEDAI) ≥10), with false discovery rate correction for multiple comparisons.
resultsThirty-one RCTs (17 374 participants) were included. Overall, biologics improved SLE Responder Index-4 response versus control (risk ratio (RR) 1.26, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.33, p <0.0001). Serologically active disease showed the strongest predictive value (RR 1.45, 95% CI 1.28 to 1.63, p<0.0001, I²=0%, number needed to treat (NNT)=6.5). High baseline SLEDAI ≥10 also predicted response (RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.32, I²=0%). IGS showed non-significant trends (RR 1.39, 95% CI 0.97 to 2.00, p=0.074, I²=68.5%). Efficacy varied by mechanism, with anti-BAFF agents showing consistent benefit (RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.26 to 1.45). Biologics reduced serious adverse events (SAE) (RR 0.90, p=0.009); this should be interpreted considering lupus flares contribute to SAE counts. Individual non-disease adverse events showed expected patterns, with herpes zoster significantly increased (RR 1.19, p=0.017).
conclusionSerologically active disease and high baseline disease activity significantly predict biologic therapy response with zero heterogeneity, while IGS showed inconsistent predictive value. These findings support using serological markers to guide biologic selection in real-world practice settings. Biologics demonstrate favourable safety profiles. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD420251247531.
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.