ReviewFrontiers in immunology2026
Tumor safety of biologic agents and targeted therapies in immune-mediated inflammatory arthritides.
Review in Frontiers in immunology, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Immune-mediated inflammatory arthritides (IMIA), including rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, axial spondyloarthritis, and juvenile idiopathic arthritis, are chronic immune-driven disorders in which long-term malignancy safety has become a key determinant of therapeutic decision-making. Patients with IMIA are not oncologically neutral at baseline; persistent inflammatory burden, smoking exposure, age, and cumulative immunosuppressive treatment all modify cancer susceptibility. Against this background, biologic and targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs may both reduce inflammation-associated oncogenic pressure and attenuate antitumor immune surveillance. In this narrative review, we synthesize current evidence on tumor safety across major biologic classes and Janus kinase inhibitors, with emphasis on data emerging through early 2026. Overall, most biologic therapies appear broadly reassuring with respect to overall malignancy, although non-melanoma skin cancer remains the most reproducible treatment-associated signal, particularly with tumor necrosis factor inhibitors and possibly abatacept. Rituximab retains a favorable profile in patients with prior lymphoproliferative disease, whereas IL-6 and IL-17/23 pathway inhibitors appear largely neutral or reassuring in currently available datasets. By contrast, JAK inhibitors require greater caution in risk-enriched rheumatoid arthritis populations, especially older patients, smokers, and those with prior malignancy or prolonged treatment exposure. Recent register-based studies have shown that overall cancer incidence with JAK inhibitors is comparable to that with TNF inhibitors, although lung and keratinocyte cancers occur more frequently in certain risk groups; accordingly, updated 2025 EULAR guidance recommends early initiation of targeted therapy after cancer remission and tailoring drug choice to prior cancer type and patient-specific factors. We further examine tumor-type-specific patterns, major modifiers of risk, and practical risk-stratified management strategies. The central clinical message is that malignancy safety in IMIA should be interpreted through an individualized framework that balances inflammatory control against oncologic vulnerability rather than through uniform class-based avoidance.
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.