SynthesisAdvances in therapy2026
Indirect Treatment Comparison of Tezepelumab Versus Other Biologics in Severe Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Nasal Polyps: A Systematic Literature Review and Network Meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Advances in therapy, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study compared the efficacy of tezepelumab with other approved biologics and endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) using indirect treatment comparisons (ITCs) in adults with severe, uncontrolled chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP).
methodsRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) identified via a systematic literature review (SLR) were synthesized in a network meta-analysis (NMA). Outcomes included change from baseline in nasal polyp score (NPS), nasal congestion/obstruction score (NCS/NOS), difficulty with sense of smell (DSS), Sino-Nasal Outcome Test-22 (SNOT-22) score, Lund Mackay score (LMS), time to nasal polyposis (NP) surgery decision, proportions requiring NP surgery or systemic corticosteroids (SCS), time to SCS use, and the University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT). Mean differences, hazard ratios, and odds ratios with 95% credible intervals were estimated for available treatments at 52 weeks. Not all endpoints were reported across trials; comparisons were conducted only where both treatments reported the outcome.
resultsAt 52 weeks, tezepelumab showed comparable efficacy to dupilumab across all evaluated endpoints, apart from the proportion of patients requiring surgery, where tezepelumab was associated with a lower surgery rate than dupilumab. Tezepelumab consistently outperformed mepolizumab, depemokimab, and placebo. In analyses of < 30-week endpoints, tezepelumab outperformed omalizumab for all outcomes except SNOT-22, where no difference was observed. Sensitivity analyses including ESS showed benefits for tezepelumab across endpoints except for NPS, for which ESS ranked highest.
conclusionTezepelumab achieved similar efficacy to dupilumab across all evaluated endpoints with the exception of the proportion of patients requiring surgery, where tezepelumab demonstrated a numerically greater reduction compared with dupilumab. Results consistently favoured tezepelumab and dupilumab over depemokimab, mepolizumab, and omalizumab.
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.