SynthesisDermatology online journal2026
Efficacy and safety of emerging immunomodulatory agents versus standard therapies in refractory cutaneous lupus: A systematic review.
Synthesis in Dermatology online journal, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Refractory cutaneous lupus (RCL) remains challenging to treat, with limited response to standard therapies. Emerging immunomodulatory agents, including thalidomide, lenalidomide, anifrolumab, belimumab, and intravenous immunoglobulin, may offer improved outcomes. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of emerging immunomodulatory agents in adults with RCL. Methods: A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of the specified agents in adults with RCL were included. Databases searched included MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS. Primary outcomes were CLASI, BICLA, and SRI-4 response rates. Secondary outcomes included adverse events and quality of life. Results: Anifrolumab achieved CLASI-50 in up to 63.0% of patients versus 30.8% with placebo and BICLA response in up to 53.5% versus 25.7%. Belimumab improved SRI-4 response to 43.2% versus 33.5% with placebo. RSLV-132 and tofacitinib demonstrated partial efficacy. Herpes zoster was more frequent with anifrolumab. Conclusion: Anifrolumab and belimumab provide superior efficacy with acceptable safety in RCL, supporting their inclusion in personalized treatment algorithms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42522483What 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.