Dataset Information

Risk of Serious Infections in Patients with Psoriasis on Biologic Therapies: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT: A comprehensive evaluation of the risk of serious infections in biologic therapies for psoriasis is lacking. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective cohort studies reporting serious infections in people taking any licensed biologic therapy for psoriasis compared with those taking placebo, nonbiologic therapy, or other biologic therapies. The quality of the studies was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation criteria. No significant heterogeneity was detected in data from 32 RCTs (n = 13,359 participants) and one cohort study (n = 4,993 participants). In adults, low- to very-low-quality RCT data showed no significant difference between any biologic therapy and placebo at weeks 12-16 (overall pooled Peto odds ratio = 0.71, 95% confidence interval = 0.36-1.41) and weeks 20-30 (odds ratio = 2.27, 95% confidence interval = 0.45-11.49). No significant differences were found in any of the other comparisons in underpowered RCT data. Prospective cohort study data of low quality suggests that only adalimumab (adjusted hazard ratio [adjHR] = 2.52, 95% confidence interval = 1.47-4.32) was associated with a significantly higher risk of serious infection compared with retinoid and/or phototherapy in adults. No association between biologic therapies and serious infections in patients with psoriasis who were eligible for RCTs was detected. Further observational studies are needed to inform the uncertainty around this risk in the real world.

SUBMITTER: Yiu ZZN

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4946794 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Risk of Serious Infections in Patients with Psoriasis on Biologic Therapies: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Yiu Zenas Z N ZZN Exton Lesley S LS Jabbar-Lopez Zarif Z Mohd Mustapa M Firouz MF Samarasekera Eleanor J EJ Burden A David AD Murphy Ruth R Owen Caroline M CM Parslew Richard R Venning Vanessa V Ashcroft Darren M DM Griffiths Christopher E M CEM Smith Catherine H CH Warren Richard B RB

The Journal of investigative dermatology 20160413 8

A comprehensive evaluation of the risk of serious infections in biologic therapies for psoriasis is lacking. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective cohort studies reporting serious infections in people taking any licensed biologic therapy for psoriasis compared with those taking placebo, nonbiologic therapy, or other biologic therapies. The quality of the studies was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Developme ...[more]

PMID: 27085754

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background & aimsWe performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the comparative risk of serious infections with tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists, non-TNF targeted biologics, tofacitinib, and immunosuppressive agents in patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs).MethodsIn a systematic search of publications, through March 18, 2018, we identified 15 observational studies (>500 person-years) of patients with IBD treated with TNF antagonists, non-TNF targeted biologics, tofacitinib, and/or immunosuppressive agents (thiopurines, methotrexate) that reported risk of serious infections. Only studies with active comparators were included, to allow appropriate comparative synthesis. We performed random-effects meta-analysis and estimated relative risk (RR) and 95% CIs.ResultsCompared with anti-TNF monotherapy, risk of serious infection increased with the combination of anti-TNF and an immunosuppressive agent (in 6 cohorts: RR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.03-1.37), with anti-TNF and a corticosteroid (in 4 cohorts: RR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.33-2.03), or with all 3 drugs (in 2 cohorts: RR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.04-1.77); there was minimal heterogeneity among studies. In contrast, monotherapy with an immunosuppressive agent was associated with a lower risk of serious infections than monotherapy with a TNF antagonist (7 cohorts: RR, 0.61; 95% CI 0.44-0.84) or a TNF antagonist with an immunosuppressive agent (2 cohorts: RR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.39-0.81). Infliximab-based therapy was associated with a lower risk of serious infections compared with adalimumab-based therapy in patients with ulcerative colitis (4 cohorts: RR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.33-0.97), but not Crohn's disease (4 cohorts: RR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.49-1.70). Few data were available on the comparative safety of biologic agents that do not inhibit TNF and tofacitinib.ConclusionsCombination therapies for IBD that include TNF antagonists, especially with corticosteroids, are associated with a higher risk of serious infection, whereas monotherapy with an immunosuppressive agent is associated with a lower risk, compared with monotherapy with a TNF antagonist. Studies are needed to evaluate the comparative safety of non-TNF targeted biologics and small molecules for treatment of IBD.

Project description:BackgroundTofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Tofacitinib modulates the signaling of cytokines that are integral to lymphocyte activation, proliferation, and function. Thus, tofacitinib therapy may result in suppression of multiple elements of the immune response. Serious infections have been reported in tofacitinib RA trials. However, limited head-to-head comparator data were available within the tofacitinib RA development program to directly compare rates of serious infections with tofacitinib relative to biologic agents, and specifically adalimumab (employed as an active control agent in two randomized controlled trials of tofacitinib).MethodsA systematic literature search of data from interventional randomized controlled trials and long-term extension studies with biologics in RA was carried out. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) consensus was followed for reporting results of the review and meta-analysis. Incidence rates (unique patients with events/100 patient-years) for each therapy were estimated based on data from randomized controlled trials and long-term extension studies using a random-effects model. Relative and absolute risk comparisons versus placebo used Mantel-Haenszel methods.ResultsThe search produced 657 hits. In total, 66 randomized controlled trials and 22 long-term extension studies met the selection criteria. Estimated incidence rates (95% confidence intervals [CIs]) for abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab, and tumor necrosis factor inhibitors were 3.04 (2.49, 3.72), 3.72 (2.99, 4.62), 5.45 (4.26, 6.96), and 4.90 (4.41, 5.44), respectively. Incidence rates (95% CIs) for tofacitinib 5 and 10 mg twice daily (BID) in phase 3 trials were 3.02 (2.25, 4.05) and 3.00 (2.24, 4.02), respectively. Corresponding incidence rates in long-term extension studies were 2.50 (2.05, 3.04) and 3.19 (2.74, 3.72). The risk ratios (95% CIs) versus placebo for tofacitinib 5 and 10 mg BID were 2.21 (0.60, 8.14) and 2.02 (0.56, 7.28), respectively. Risk differences (95% CIs) versus placebo for tofacitinib 5 and 10 mg BID were 0.38% (-0.24%, 0.99%) and 0.40% (-0.22%, 1.02%), respectively.ConclusionsIn interventional studies, the risk of serious infections with tofacitinib is comparable to published rates for biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in patients with moderate to severely active RA.

Project description:BackgroundThe cardiovascular safety profile of biologic therapies used for psoriasis is unclear.ObjectivesTo compare the risk of major cardiovascular events (CVEs; acute coronary syndrome, unstable angina, myocardial infarction and stroke) in patients with chronic plaque psoriasis treated with adalimumab, etanercept or ustekinumab in a large prospective cohort.MethodsProspective cohort study examining the comparative risk of major CVEs was conducted using the British Association of Dermatologists Biologics and Immunomodulators Register. The main analysis compared adults with chronic plaque psoriasis receiving ustekinumab with tumour necrosis-α inhibitors (TNFi: etanercept and adalimumab), whilst the secondary analyses compared ustekinumab, etanercept or methotrexate against adalimumab. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using overlap weights by propensity score to balance baseline covariates among comparison groups.ResultsWe included 5468 biologic-naïve patients subsequently exposed (951 ustekinumab; 1313 etanercept; and 3204 adalimumab) in the main analysis. The secondary analyses also included 2189 patients receiving methotrexate. The median (p25-p75) follow-up times for patients using ustekinumab, TNFi, adalimumab, etanercept and methotrexate were as follows: 2.01 (1.16-3.21), 1.93 (1.05-3.34), 1.94 (1.09-3.32), 1.92 (0.93-3.45) and 1.43 (0.84-2.53) years, respectively. Ustekinumab, TNFi, adalimumab, etanercept and methotrexate groups had 7, 29, 23, 6 and 9 patients experiencing major CVEs, respectively. No differences in the risk of major CVEs were observed between biologic therapies [adjusted HR for ustekinumab vs. TNFi: 0.96 (95% CI 0.41-2.22); ustekinumab vs. adalimumab: 0.81 (0.30-2.17); etanercept vs. adalimumab: 0.81 (0.28-2.30)] and methotrexate against adalimumab [1.05 (0.34-3.28)].ConclusionsIn this large prospective cohort study, we found no significant differences in the risk of major CVEs between three different biologic therapies and methotrexate. Additional studies, with longer term follow-up, are needed to investigate the potential effects of biologic therapies on incidence of major CVEs.

Dataset Information

Risk of Serious Infections in Patients with Psoriasis on Biologic Therapies: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Publications

Risk of Serious Infections in Patients with Psoriasis on Biologic Therapies: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets