-
The Lancet. Gastroenterology &... Dec 2021Data are needed to inform the positioning of biologic therapy in the treatment of moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease, both first line and after previous biologic... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Data are needed to inform the positioning of biologic therapy in the treatment of moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease, both first line and after previous biologic exposure. We aimed to assess the comparative efficacy and safety of biologics in patients with Crohn's disease.
METHODS
We did a systematic review and network meta-analysis of phase 2 and phase 3 randomised controlled trials done in adults (≥18 years) with moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease (Crohn's Disease Activity Index [CDAI] 220-450) treated with tumour necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists, anti-integrin, anti-interleukin (IL)-12 and IL-23p40, or anti-IL23p19 agents, either alone or in combination with immunosuppressants, as their first-line biologic or after previous biologic exposure, compared with placebo or an active comparator. The minimum duration of therapy was 14 days for trials reporting induction of remission in active disease and 22 weeks in trials reporting maintenance of remission. We searched Medline, EMBASE, the Cochrane CENTRAL Register of Controlled Trials, conference proceedings, trial registries, and unpublished data from inception to June 3, 2021, without any language restrictions. Summary estimates of the primary and secondary outcomes were extracted from the published reports; individual patient-level data were not sought. The primary endpoint was induction of clinical remission in patients with active disease (CDAI <150) and maintenance of remission in patients with response to induction therapy, with data extracted from published reports. A network meta-analysis with multivariate consistency model random-effects meta-regression was done, with rankings based on surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) values.
FINDINGS
The search strategy yielded 18 382 citations, of which 31 trials were eligible for inclusion. On the basis of 15 randomised controlled trials including 2931 biologic-naive patients, infliximab monotherapy (odds ratio [OR] 4·53 [95% CI 1·49-13·79]), infliximab combined with azathioprine (7·49 [2·04-27·49]), adalimumab (3·01 [1·25-7·27]), and ustekinumab (2·63 [1·10-6·28]) were associated with significantly higher odds of inducing remission compared to certolizumab pegol (all moderate confidence); infliximab and azathioprine combination therapy was also associated with significantly higher odds of inducing remission than vedolizumab (3·76 [1·01-14·03]; low confidence). On the basis of ten randomised controlled trials including 2479 patients with previous biologic exposure, adalimumab after loss of response to infliximab (OR 2·82 [95% CI 1·20-6·62]; low confidence), and risankizumab (2·10 [1·12-3·92]; moderate confidence), were associated with higher odds of inducing remission than vedolizumab. No differences between active interventions were observed in maintenance trials. Most trials were at low or uncertain risk of bias.
INTERPRETATION
Although biologic treatment choices in patients with moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease must be individualised for each patient, this analysis suggests that either infliximab with azathioprine or adalimumab might be preferred as a first-line therapy, and adalimumab (after infliximab loss of response) or risankizumab might be preferred as a second-line therapy, for induction of clinical remission.
FUNDING
None.
Topics: Adalimumab; Adult; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Azathioprine; Benzene Derivatives; Biological Therapy; Carboxylic Acids; Case-Control Studies; Crohn Disease; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Humans; Immunosuppressive Agents; Infliximab; Interleukin-12 Subunit p40; Interleukin-23 Subunit p19; Male; Network Meta-Analysis; Placebos; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Remission Induction; Safety; Severity of Illness Index; Treatment Outcome; Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors; Ustekinumab
PubMed: 34688373
DOI: 10.1016/S2468-1253(21)00312-5 -
Journal of Clinical Oncology : Official... Jan 2023To develop recommendations for treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).
PURPOSE
To develop recommendations for treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).
METHODS
ASCO convened an Expert Panel to conduct a systematic review of relevant studies and develop recommendations for clinical practice.
RESULTS
Five systematic reviews and 10 randomized controlled trials met the systematic review inclusion criteria.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Doublet chemotherapy should be offered, or triplet therapy may be offered to patients with previously untreated, initially unresectable mCRC, on the basis of included studies of chemotherapy in combination with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor antibodies. In the first-line setting, pembrolizumab is recommended for patients with mCRC and microsatellite instability-high or deficient mismatch repair tumors; chemotherapy and anti-epidermal growth factor receptor therapy is recommended for microsatellite stable or proficient mismatch repair left-sided treatment-naive wild-type mCRC; chemotherapy and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy is recommended for microsatellite stable or proficient mismatch repair wild-type right-sided mCRC. Encorafenib plus cetuximab is recommended for patients with previously treated V600E-mutant mCRC that has progressed after at least one previous line of therapy. Cytoreductive surgery plus systemic chemotherapy may be recommended for selected patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases; however, the addition of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy is not recommended. Stereotactic body radiation therapy may be recommended following systemic therapy for patients with oligometastases of the liver who are not considered candidates for resection. Selective internal radiation therapy is not routinely recommended for patients with unilobar or bilobar metastases of the liver. Perioperative chemotherapy or surgery alone should be offered to patients with mCRC who are candidates for potentially curative resection of liver metastases. Multidisciplinary team management and shared decision making are recommended. Qualifying statements with further details related to implementation of guideline recommendations are also included.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/gastrointestinal-cancer-guidelines.
Topics: Humans; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Cetuximab; Colonic Neoplasms; Colorectal Neoplasms; Endothelial Growth Factors; Rectal Neoplasms; Practice Guidelines as Topic
PubMed: 36252154
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.22.01690 -
Osteoporosis International : a Journal... Jan 2022The study was conducted to illustrate the effect of Romosozumab in postmenopausal osteoporosis patients. Romosozumab decreased the incidence of vertebral, nonvertebral,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The study was conducted to illustrate the effect of Romosozumab in postmenopausal osteoporosis patients. Romosozumab decreased the incidence of vertebral, nonvertebral, and clinical fractures significantly. In addition, decreased incidence of falls and increased bone mineral density at lumbar spine, total hip, and femoral neck was observed. Romosozumab is a monoclonal antibody that acts against the sclerostin pathway leading to enhanced bone formation and reduced bone resorption in patients with osteoporosis. Electronic search was performed on Medline (via PubMed), The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and clinicaltrials.gov, till May 2020, for RCTs evaluating the effectiveness of Romosozumab in postmenopausal osteoporosis. RCTs evaluating the effect of Romosozumab on fractures and bone mineral density in postmenopausal osteoporosis patients. Meta-analysis was performed by Cochrane review manager 5 (RevMan) version 5.3. Cochrane risk of bias 2.0 tool and GRADE pro-GDT were applied for methodological quality and overall evidence quality, respectively. One hundred seventy-nine studies were screened, and 10 eligible studies were included in the analysis, with a total of 6137 patients in romosozumab group and 5732 patients in control group. Romosozumab significantly reduced the incidence of vertebral fractures [OR = 0.43 (95%CI = 0.35-0.52), High-quality evidence], nonvertebral fractures [OR = 0.78 (95%CI = 0.66-0.92), High quality], and clinical fractures [OR = 0.70 (95%CI = 0.60-0.82), High quality] at 24 months. Significant reduction in incidence risk of falls [OR = 0.87 (95%CI = 0.78-0.96), High quality] was observed with romosozumab. Bone mineral density was significantly increased in the romosozumab treated groups at lumbar spine [MD = 12.66 (95%CI = 12.66-12.67), High quality], total hip [MD = 5.69 (95%CI = 5.68 - 5.69), Moderate quality], and femoral neck [MD = 5.18 (95%CI = 5.18-5.19), Moderate quality] at 12 months. The total adverse events [RR = 0.98(95%CI = 0.96-1.01), Moderate quality] and serious adverse events [RR = 0.98(95%CI = 0.88-1.08), Moderate quality] with romosozumab were comparable to the control group. The current analysis with evidence on efficacy and safety of Romosozumab, authors opine to recommend the use of Romosozumab treatment for post-menopausal osteoporosis.Systematic review registration: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42019112196.
Topics: Antibodies, Monoclonal; Bone Density; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Female; Humans; Osteoporosis, Postmenopausal
PubMed: 34432115
DOI: 10.1007/s00198-021-06095-y -
Gut Feb 2023There are numerous biological therapies and small molecules licensed for luminal Crohn's disease (CD), but these are often studied in placebo-controlled trials, meaning... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
There are numerous biological therapies and small molecules licensed for luminal Crohn's disease (CD), but these are often studied in placebo-controlled trials, meaning relative efficacy is uncertain. We examined this in a network meta-analysis.
DESIGN
We searched the literature to 1 July 2022, judging efficacy according to induction of clinical remission, clinical response and maintenance of clinical remission, and according to previous exposure or non-exposure to biologics. We used a random effects model and reported data as pooled relative risks (RRs) with 95% CIs, ranking drugs according to p-score.
RESULTS
We identified 25 induction of remission trials (8720 patients). Based on failure to achieve clinical remission, infliximab 5 mg/kg ranked first versus placebo (RR=0.67, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.79, p-score 0.95), with risankizumab 600 mg second and upadacitinib 45 mg once daily third. However, risankizumab 600 mg ranked first for clinical remission in biologic-naïve (RR=0.66, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.85, p-score 0.78) and in biologic-exposed patients (RR=0.74, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.82, p-score 0.92). In 15 maintenance of remission trials (4016 patients), based on relapse of disease activity, upadacitinib 30 mg once daily ranked first (RR=0.61, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.72, p-score 0.93) with adalimumab 40 mg weekly second, and infliximab 10 mg/kg 8-weekly third. Adalimumab 40 mg weekly ranked first in biologic-naïve patients (RR=0.59, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.73, p-score 0.86), and vedolizumab 108 mg 2-weekly first in biologic-exposed (RR=0.70, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.86, p-score 0.82).
CONCLUSION
In a network meta-analysis, infliximab 5 mg/kg ranked first for induction of clinical remission in all patients with luminal CD, but risankizumab 600 mg was first in biologic-naïve and biologic-exposed patients. Upadacitinib 30 mg once daily ranked first for maintenance of remission.
Topics: Humans; Crohn Disease; Adalimumab; Infliximab; Network Meta-Analysis; Biological Therapy; Remission Induction
PubMed: 35907636
DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2022-328052 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2022Psoriasis is an immune-mediated disease with either skin or joints manifestations, or both, and it has a major impact on quality of life. Although there is currently no... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Psoriasis is an immune-mediated disease with either skin or joints manifestations, or both, and it has a major impact on quality of life. Although there is currently no cure for psoriasis, various treatment strategies allow sustained control of disease signs and symptoms. The relative benefit of these treatments remains unclear due to the limited number of trials comparing them directly head-to-head, which is why we chose to conduct a network meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the efficacy and safety of non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biologics for people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis using a network meta-analysis, and to provide a ranking of these treatments according to their efficacy and safety.
SEARCH METHODS
For this update of the living systematic review, we updated our searches of the following databases monthly to October 2021: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic treatments in adults over 18 years with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis, at any stage of treatment, compared to placebo or another active agent. The primary outcomes were: proportion of participants who achieved clear or almost clear skin, that is, at least Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90; proportion of participants with serious adverse events (SAEs) at induction phase (8 to 24 weeks after randomisation).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We conducted duplicate study selection, data extraction, risk of bias assessment and analyses. We synthesised data using pairwise and network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare treatments and rank them according to effectiveness (PASI 90 score) and acceptability (inverse of SAEs). We assessed the certainty of NMA evidence for the two primary outcomes and all comparisons using CINeMA, as very low, low, moderate, or high. We contacted study authors when data were unclear or missing. We used the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to infer treatment hierarchy, from 0% (worst for effectiveness or safety) to 100% (best for effectiveness or safety).
MAIN RESULTS
This update includes an additional 19 studies, taking the total number of included studies to 167, and randomised participants to 58,912, 67.2% men, mainly recruited from hospitals. Average age was 44.5 years, mean PASI score at baseline was 20.4 (range: 9.5 to 39). Most studies were placebo-controlled (57%). We assessed a total of 20 treatments. Most (140) trials were multicentric (two to 231 centres). One-third of the studies (57/167) had high risk of bias; 23 unclear risk, and most (87) low risk. Most studies (127/167) declared funding by a pharmaceutical company, and 24 studies did not report a funding source. Network meta-analysis at class level showed that all interventions (non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biological treatments) showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than placebo. Anti-IL17 treatment showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 compared to all the interventions, except anti-IL23. Biologic treatments anti-IL17, anti-IL12/23, anti-IL23 and anti-TNF alpha showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than the non-biological systemic agents. For reaching PASI 90, the most effective drugs when compared to placebo were (SUCRA rank order, all high-certainty evidence): infliximab (risk ratio (RR) 50.19, 95% CI 20.92 to 120.45), bimekizumab (RR 30.27, 95% CI 25.45 to 36.01), ixekizumab (RR 30.19, 95% CI 25.38 to 35.93), risankizumab (RR 28.75, 95% CI 24.03 to 34.39). Clinical effectiveness of these drugs was similar when compared against each other. Bimekizumab, ixekizumab and risankizumab showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than other anti-IL17 drugs (secukinumab and brodalumab) and guselkumab. Infliximab, anti-IL17 drugs (bimekizumab, ixekizumab, secukinumab and brodalumab) and anti-IL23 drugs (risankizumab and guselkumab) except tildrakizumab showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than ustekinumab and three anti-TNF alpha agents (adalimumab, certolizumab and etanercept). Ustekinumab was superior to certolizumab; adalimumab and ustekinumab were superior to etanercept. No significant difference was shown between apremilast and two non-biological drugs: ciclosporin and methotrexate. We found no significant difference between any of the interventions and the placebo for the risk of SAEs. The risk of SAEs was significantly lower for participants on methotrexate compared with most of the interventions. Nevertheless, the SAE analyses were based on a very low number of events with low- to moderate-certainty for all the comparisons (except methotrexate versus placebo, which was high-certainty). The findings therefore have to be viewed with caution. For other efficacy outcomes (PASI 75 and Physician Global Assessment (PGA) 0/1), the results were similar to the results for PASI 90. Information on quality of life was often poorly reported and was absent for several of the interventions.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Our review shows that, compared to placebo, the biologics infliximab, bimekizumab, ixekizumab, and risankizumab were the most effective treatments for achieving PASI 90 in people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis on the basis of high-certainty evidence. This NMA evidence is limited to induction therapy (outcomes measured from 8 to 24 weeks after randomisation), and is not sufficient for evaluating longer-term outcomes in this chronic disease. Moreover, we found low numbers of studies for some of the interventions, and the young age (mean 44.5 years) and high level of disease severity (PASI 20.4 at baseline) may not be typical of patients seen in daily clinical practice. We found no significant difference in the assessed interventions and placebo in terms of SAEs, and the safety evidence for most interventions was low to moderate quality. More randomised trials directly comparing active agents are needed, and these should include systematic subgroup analyses (sex, age, ethnicity, comorbidities, psoriatic arthritis). To provide long-term information on the safety of treatments included in this review, an evaluation of non-randomised studies and postmarketing reports from regulatory agencies is needed. Editorial note: This is a living systematic review. Living systematic reviews offer a new approach to review updating, in which the review is continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.
Topics: Adalimumab; Adult; Biological Products; Etanercept; Female; Humans; Infliximab; Male; Methotrexate; Network Meta-Analysis; Psoriasis; Systematic Reviews as Topic; Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha; Ustekinumab
PubMed: 35603936
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011535.pub5 -
Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology Mar 2023Dermatomyositis (DM) is an idiopathic inflammatory myopathy that commonly manifests with proximal muscle weakness and is associated with extramuscular pathology,... (Review)
Review
Dermatomyositis (DM) is an idiopathic inflammatory myopathy that commonly manifests with proximal muscle weakness and is associated with extramuscular pathology, including characteristic skin lesions such as Gottron's papules and heliotrope rash, as well as lung, gastrointestinal, joint, and cardiac involvement. Systemic corticosteroids are a cornerstone of therapy, and more recently intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG; OCTAGAM®) has been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of adults with DM. Both steroids and IVIG represent nonspecific anti-inflammatory therapy, and more targeted approaches are lacking. Transcriptomics has identified upregulation of interferon (IFN)-regulated genes as key features of both adult DM and juvenile DM (JDM). Accordingly, blocking IFN signalling through inhibition of the Janus kinase (JAK) pathway represents a potential treatment option for DM. Placebo-controlled trial data assessing the use of JAK inhibitors for the treatment of DM are limited; as such, a systematic literature review was undertaken to assess the evidence of JAK inhibitors in the treatment of patients with DM. Terms related to DM and JAK inhibitors were searched using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and Dimensions to identify peer-reviewed publications reporting patients with DM who were treated with a JAK inhibitor. Baseline demographics, clinical characteristics, and treatment outcome data were extracted. A total of 48 publications reporting 145 unique patients (adult DM, n=84; JDM, n=61) were identified. Among cases of adult DM, 61 of 84 (73%) had refractory skin disease at baseline, and all (61 of 61) reported improvement in cutaneous symptoms. Of patients with adult DM, 16 of 84 (19%) had refractory muscle disease at baseline, and all (16 of 16) reported improvement in muscle symptoms. In patients with adult DM complicated by interstitial lung disease (ILD; n=33), 31 (94%) patients improved with JAK inhibitor treatment. Among cases of JDM with refractory skin disease at baseline (60 of 61), most patients (57 of 60; 95%) showed improvements in skin symptoms after JAK inhibitor treatment. Of patients with JDM with refractory muscle disease at baseline (36 of 61), most (30 of 36; 83%) reported improvement in muscle symptoms. Four patients with JDM and ILD experienced improvement in lung disease activity following treatment with a JAK inhibitor. Among both DM and JDM cases, all patients (17 with DM and 16 with JDM) who had elevated serum IFN and/or IFN-stimulated gene expression at baseline showed reduction in IFN or IFN gene expression. Although the conclusions that can be drawn from this analysis are limited because of the differences in assessments used across publications, overall treatment of patients with DM or JDM with a JAK inhibitor was associated with significant improvement of a wide range of DM manifestations, including skin lesions, muscle weakness, and ILD. Our systematic literature review suggests that JAK inhibitors may be a viable treatment option for DM/JDM, and randomised controlled trials are necessary to confirm these findings.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Dermatomyositis; Janus Kinase Inhibitors; Immunoglobulins, Intravenous; Muscular Diseases; Muscle Weakness; Lung Diseases, Interstitial
PubMed: 35766013
DOI: 10.55563/clinexprheumatol/hxin6o -
Journal of Neurology Oct 2021Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP) is a rare neurological disorder characterised by muscle weakness and impaired sensory function. The present... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP) is a rare neurological disorder characterised by muscle weakness and impaired sensory function. The present study provides a comprehensive literature review of the burden of illness of CIDP.
METHODS
Systematic literature search of PubMed, Embase, and key conferences in May 2019. Search terms identified studies on the epidemiology, humanistic burden, current treatment, and economic burden of CIDP published since 2009 in English.
RESULTS
Forty-five full texts and nineteen conference proceedings were identified on the epidemiology (n = 9), humanistic burden (n = 7), current treatment (n = 40), and economic burden (n = 8) of CIDP. Epidemiological studies showed incidence and prevalence of 0.2-1.6 and 0.8-8.9 per 100,000, respectively, depending on geography and diagnostic criteria. Humanistic burden studies revealed that patients experienced physical and psychosocial burden, including impaired physical function, pain and depression. Publications on current treatments reported on six main types of therapy: intravenous immunoglobulins, subcutaneous immunoglobulins, corticosteroids, plasma exchange, immunosuppressants, and immunomodulators. Treatments may be burdensome, due to adverse events and reduced independence caused by treatment administration setting. In Germany, UK, France, and the US, CIDP economic burden was driven by direct costs of treatment and hospitalisation. CIDP was associated with indirect costs driven by impaired productivity.
CONCLUSIONS
This first systematic review of CIDP burden of illness demonstrates the high physical and psychosocial burden of this rare disease. Future research is required to fully characterise the burden of CIDP, and to understand how appropriate treatment can mitigate burden for patients and healthcare systems.
Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Cost of Illness; Humans; Immunoglobulins, Intravenous; Plasma Exchange; Polyradiculoneuropathy, Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating
PubMed: 32583051
DOI: 10.1007/s00415-020-09998-8 -
JAMA Dermatology Mar 2020The clinical benefits of novel treatments for moderate to severe psoriasis are well established, but wide variations exist in patient response across different... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
The clinical benefits of novel treatments for moderate to severe psoriasis are well established, but wide variations exist in patient response across different therapies. In the absence of head-to-head randomized trials, meta-analyses synthesizing data from multiple studies are needed to assess comparative efficacy among psoriasis treatments.
OBJECTIVE
To estimate the relative short-term and long-term efficacy of biologics and oral agents for the treatment of moderate to severe psoriasis.
DATA SOURCES
A systematic literature review was conducted on December 4, 2017, and updated on September 17, 2018. The Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Central Register databases were included.
STUDY SELECTION
Phase 2, 3, or 4 randomized clinical trials of treatments licensed by the US Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency for adults with moderate to severe psoriasis with data on Psoriasis Area and Severity Index assessment of 75%, 90%, and 100% reductions (PASI 75, 90, and 100) at 10 to 16 weeks (short-term efficacy) or 44 to 60 weeks (long-term efficacy) from baseline.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Data were extracted based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis guidelines. A bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted to estimate short-term PASI response rates; to account for variation across trials, an ordinal model that adjusted for reference arm response was implemented. The long-term PASI rates were estimated via a traditional meta-analysis.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
PASI 75, 90, and 100 response rates at 10 to 16 weeks and 44 to 60 weeks from baseline.
RESULTS
Sixty trials meeting all inclusion criteria were included. At weeks 10 to 16, the highest PASI 90 rates were seen with risankizumab-rzaa (71.6%; 95% credible interval [CrI], 67.5%-75.4%), brodalumab (70.8%; 95% CrI, 66.8%-74.6%), ixekizumab (70.6%; 95% CrI, 66.8%-74.6%), and guselkumab (67.3%; 62.5%-71.9%). At weeks 44 to 60, the treatments with the highest PASI 90 rates were risankizumab-rzaa (79.4%, 95% CI, 75.5%-82.9%), guselkumab (76.5%; 95% CI, 72.1%-80.5%), brodalumab (74.0%; 95% CI, 69.3%-78.1%), and ixekizumab (73.9%; 95% CI, 69.9%-77.5%). Findings were consistent for short-term and long-term PASI 75 and 100 responses.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
This study provides an assessment of the comparative efficacy among treatments for moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. The meta-analysis suggests that brodalumab, guselkumab, ixekizumab, and risankizumab-rzaa were associated with the highest PASI response rates in both short-term and long-term therapy.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Adult; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Biological Products; Dermatologic Agents; Humans; Psoriasis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Severity of Illness Index
PubMed: 32022825
DOI: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2019.4029 -
Clinical Gastroenterology and... Sep 2020We compared the efficacy and safety of different first-line (biologic-naïve) and second-line (prior exposure to tumor necrosis factor [TNF] antagonists) agents for... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND & AIMS
We compared the efficacy and safety of different first-line (biologic-naïve) and second-line (prior exposure to tumor necrosis factor [TNF] antagonists) agents for treatment of moderate to severely active ulcerative colitis in a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
METHODS
We searched publication databases through September 30, 2019, for randomized trials of adults with moderate to severe ulcerative colitis treated with TNF antagonists, vedolizumab, tofacitinib, or ustekinumab, as first-line or second-line agents, compared with placebo or another active agent. Efficacy outcomes were induction and maintenance of remission and endoscopic improvement; safety outcomes were serious adverse events and infections. We performed a fixed-effects network meta-analysis using the frequentist approach, and calculated odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CI values. Agents were ranked using surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) probabilities. Overall quality of evidence was rated using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation).
RESULTS
In biologic-naïve patients, infliximab was ranked highest for induction of clinical remission (OR vs placebo, 4.07; 95% CI, 2.67-6.21; SUCRA, 0.95) and endoscopic improvement (SUCRA, 0.95) (moderate confidence in estimates [CE]). In patients with prior exposure to TNF antagonists, ustekinumab (SUCRA, 0.87) and tofacitinib (SUCRA, 0.87) were ranked highest for induction of clinical remission and were superior to vedolizumab (ustekinumab vs vedolizumab: OR, 5.99; 95% CI, 1.13-31.76 and tofacitinib vs vedolizumab: OR, 6.18; 95% CI, 1.003-8.00; moderate CE) and adalimumab (ustekinumab vs adalimumab: OR, 10.71; 95% CI, 2.01-57.20 and tofacitinib vs adalimumab: OR, 11.05; 95% CI, 1.79-68.41; moderate CE). Vedolizumab had the lowest risk of infections (SUCRA, 0.81), followed by ustekinumab (SUCRA, 0.63) in maintenance trials.
CONCLUSIONS
In a systematic review and network meta-analysis, we found infliximab to be ranked highest in biologic-naïve patients, and ustekinumab and tofacitinib were ranked highest in patients with prior exposure to TNF antagonists, for induction of remission and endoscopic improvement in patients with moderate to severe ulcerative colitis. More trials of direct comparisons are needed to inform clinical decision making with greater confidence.
Topics: Adalimumab; Adult; Colitis, Ulcerative; Humans; Infliximab; Network Meta-Analysis; Ustekinumab
PubMed: 31945470
DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2020.01.008 -
ESMO Open Apr 2023Programmed death-ligand 1[PD-(L)1], cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated protein 4 (CTLA-4), and lymphocyte-activation gene 3 (LAG-3) inhibitors are recent breakthroughs in... (Review)
Review
Programmed death-ligand 1[PD-(L)1], cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated protein 4 (CTLA-4), and lymphocyte-activation gene 3 (LAG-3) inhibitors are recent breakthroughs in cancer treatment, however not all patients benefit from it. Thus new therapies are under investigation, such as anti-TIGIT [anti-T-cell immunoreceptor with immunoglobulin (Ig) and immunoreceptor tyrosine-based inhibitory motif domains] antibodies. TIGIT is an immune checkpoint inhibiting lymphocyte T cells by several mechanisms. In vitro models showed its inhibition could restore antitumor response. Furthermore, its association with anti-PD-(L)1 therapies could synergistically improve survival. We carried out a review of the clinical trial about TIGIT referenced in the PubMed database, finding three published clinical trials on anti-TIGIT therapies. Vibostolimab was evaluated in a phase I alone or in combination with pembrolizumab. The combination had an objective response rate of 26% in patients with a non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) naïve of anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (anti-PD-1). Etigilimab was tested in a phase I alone or in combination with nivolumab, but the study was stopped due to business reasons. In the phase II CITYSCAPE trial, tiragolumab demonstrated higher objective response rate and progression-free survival in combination with atezolizumab than atezolizumab alone in advanced PD-L1-high NSCLC. The ClinicalTrials.gov database references 70 trials of anti-TIGIT in patients with cancer, 47 of them with ongoing recruitment. Only seven were phase III, including five about patients with NSCLC, mostly with combination therapy. Data from phase I-II trials highlighted that targeting TIGIT represents a safe therapeutic approach, with an acceptable toxicity profile maintained when adding anti-PD-(L)1 antibodies. Frequent adverse events were pruritus, rash, and fatigue. Grade 3-4 adverse events were reported in nearly one in three patients. Anti-TIGIT antibodies are under development as a novel immunotherapy approach. A promising research area includes the combination with anti-PD-1 therapies in advanced NSCLCs.
Topics: Humans; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Antineoplastic Agents; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Lung Neoplasms; Nivolumab
PubMed: 36933320
DOI: 10.1016/j.esmoop.2023.101184