Bayesian network meta-analyses (NMs) were conducted to compare the efficacy (at least a 75/90/100% reduction in PASI score from baseline) and safety outcomes (any adverse event [E], any serious AE (SAE), and AEs loading to treatment discontinuation) of each treatment evaluated between Weeks 48 and 56 after baseline.
This systematic literature review was originally conducted on December 4,2017, and updated on September 17, 2018, February 19, 2021, and May 2, 2021. The 2021 update incorporates recently licensed biologics in Europe and the US, covering all doses published in randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
215 RCTs from 689 publications through May 2, 2021. A total of 14 studies were included in the MAs of long-term efficacy and safety outcomes, while 201 were excluded. The searched databases include Embase, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane library. Additional searches were conducted for the reference lists of included studies, conference proceedings, previous health technology assessment submissions, and clinical trial registries.
Rankings were quantified by the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). The benefit-risk profiles of treatments were assessed by bidimensional plots of the NMA-estimated efficacy and safety outcomes.
AbbVie Inc, funded the study and participated in the study design, research, analysis, data collection, interpretation of data, review, and approval of the publication. No honoraria or payments were made for authorship.
SUCRA: The surface under the cumulative ranking curve, a simple transformation of the mean rank, is used to provide a hierarchy of the treatments and accounts both for the location and the variance of all relative treatment effects. The larger the SUCRA value, the better the rank of the treatment.
Clear/nearly clear: At least a 75/90/100% reduction in PSI score from baseline improvement in PASI.
Tolerability: Withdrawal due to any adverse event.