Indirect comparisons of the efficacy of subsequent biological agents in patients with psoriatic arthritis with an inadequate response to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors: a meta-analysis

Patompong Ungprasert, Charat Thongprayoon, John Manley III Davis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

14 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Significant portion of patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) could not tolerate or do not have a satisfactory response to either non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), non-biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs), or even TNF inhibitors. Non-TNF inhibitor biologic agents have emerged as second-line therapy in such situation. However, the comparative efficacy of these agents remains unknown as head-to-head randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are not available. RCTs examining the efficacy of non-TNF inhibitor biologic agents in patients with PsA who experienced inadequate response or intolerance of TNF inhibitors were identified. If more than one RCT was available for a given biologic agent, the pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95 % confidence interval (CI) of achieving 20 % improvement according to American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR20) response across trials were calculated. The pooled OR for each biologic agent was then compared using the indirect comparison technique. Five RCTs of four non-TNF inhibitor biologic agents, including abatacept, secukinumab, ustekinumab, and apremilast, with 675 participants were identified and included in the data analyses. We found no significant difference in any comparisons, with the p values ranging from 0.14 to 0.98. Our study demonstrates that the likelihood of achieving the ACR20 response in patients with TNF inhibitor experience is not significantly different between the four non-TNF biologic agents. However, the interpretation of this analysis is limited by the small sample sizes. Head-to-head comparisons are still required to confirm the comparative efficacy.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1-9
Number of pages9
JournalClinical Rheumatology
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Feb 6 2016

Fingerprint

Psoriatic Arthritis
Biological Factors
Meta-Analysis
Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha
Randomized Controlled Trials
Odds Ratio
Antirheumatic Agents
Sample Size
Anti-Inflammatory Agents
Confidence Intervals
Pharmaceutical Preparations

Keywords

  • Biologic agents
  • Meta-analysis
  • Psoriatic arthritis
  • Systematic review
  • TNF inhibitors

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Rheumatology

Cite this

@article{7020e37151e3466fbe969a7f3efc3524,
title = "Indirect comparisons of the efficacy of subsequent biological agents in patients with psoriatic arthritis with an inadequate response to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors: a meta-analysis",
abstract = "Significant portion of patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) could not tolerate or do not have a satisfactory response to either non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), non-biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs), or even TNF inhibitors. Non-TNF inhibitor biologic agents have emerged as second-line therapy in such situation. However, the comparative efficacy of these agents remains unknown as head-to-head randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are not available. RCTs examining the efficacy of non-TNF inhibitor biologic agents in patients with PsA who experienced inadequate response or intolerance of TNF inhibitors were identified. If more than one RCT was available for a given biologic agent, the pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95 {\%} confidence interval (CI) of achieving 20 {\%} improvement according to American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR20) response across trials were calculated. The pooled OR for each biologic agent was then compared using the indirect comparison technique. Five RCTs of four non-TNF inhibitor biologic agents, including abatacept, secukinumab, ustekinumab, and apremilast, with 675 participants were identified and included in the data analyses. We found no significant difference in any comparisons, with the p values ranging from 0.14 to 0.98. Our study demonstrates that the likelihood of achieving the ACR20 response in patients with TNF inhibitor experience is not significantly different between the four non-TNF biologic agents. However, the interpretation of this analysis is limited by the small sample sizes. Head-to-head comparisons are still required to confirm the comparative efficacy.",
keywords = "Biologic agents, Meta-analysis, Psoriatic arthritis, Systematic review, TNF inhibitors",
author = "Patompong Ungprasert and Charat Thongprayoon and Davis, {John Manley III}",
year = "2016",
month = "2",
day = "6",
doi = "10.1007/s10067-016-3204-2",
language = "English (US)",
pages = "1--9",
journal = "Clinical Rheumatology",
issn = "0770-3198",
publisher = "Springer London",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Indirect comparisons of the efficacy of subsequent biological agents in patients with psoriatic arthritis with an inadequate response to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors

T2 - a meta-analysis

AU - Ungprasert, Patompong

AU - Thongprayoon, Charat

AU - Davis, John Manley III

PY - 2016/2/6

Y1 - 2016/2/6

N2 - Significant portion of patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) could not tolerate or do not have a satisfactory response to either non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), non-biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs), or even TNF inhibitors. Non-TNF inhibitor biologic agents have emerged as second-line therapy in such situation. However, the comparative efficacy of these agents remains unknown as head-to-head randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are not available. RCTs examining the efficacy of non-TNF inhibitor biologic agents in patients with PsA who experienced inadequate response or intolerance of TNF inhibitors were identified. If more than one RCT was available for a given biologic agent, the pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95 % confidence interval (CI) of achieving 20 % improvement according to American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR20) response across trials were calculated. The pooled OR for each biologic agent was then compared using the indirect comparison technique. Five RCTs of four non-TNF inhibitor biologic agents, including abatacept, secukinumab, ustekinumab, and apremilast, with 675 participants were identified and included in the data analyses. We found no significant difference in any comparisons, with the p values ranging from 0.14 to 0.98. Our study demonstrates that the likelihood of achieving the ACR20 response in patients with TNF inhibitor experience is not significantly different between the four non-TNF biologic agents. However, the interpretation of this analysis is limited by the small sample sizes. Head-to-head comparisons are still required to confirm the comparative efficacy.

AB - Significant portion of patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) could not tolerate or do not have a satisfactory response to either non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), non-biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs), or even TNF inhibitors. Non-TNF inhibitor biologic agents have emerged as second-line therapy in such situation. However, the comparative efficacy of these agents remains unknown as head-to-head randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are not available. RCTs examining the efficacy of non-TNF inhibitor biologic agents in patients with PsA who experienced inadequate response or intolerance of TNF inhibitors were identified. If more than one RCT was available for a given biologic agent, the pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95 % confidence interval (CI) of achieving 20 % improvement according to American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR20) response across trials were calculated. The pooled OR for each biologic agent was then compared using the indirect comparison technique. Five RCTs of four non-TNF inhibitor biologic agents, including abatacept, secukinumab, ustekinumab, and apremilast, with 675 participants were identified and included in the data analyses. We found no significant difference in any comparisons, with the p values ranging from 0.14 to 0.98. Our study demonstrates that the likelihood of achieving the ACR20 response in patients with TNF inhibitor experience is not significantly different between the four non-TNF biologic agents. However, the interpretation of this analysis is limited by the small sample sizes. Head-to-head comparisons are still required to confirm the comparative efficacy.

KW - Biologic agents

KW - Meta-analysis

KW - Psoriatic arthritis

KW - Systematic review

KW - TNF inhibitors

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84957549751&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84957549751&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s10067-016-3204-2

DO - 10.1007/s10067-016-3204-2

M3 - Article

C2 - 26852316

AN - SCOPUS:84957549751

SP - 1

EP - 9

JO - Clinical Rheumatology

JF - Clinical Rheumatology

SN - 0770-3198

ER -