Cargando…

A Systematic Literature Review and Bucher Indirect Comparison: Tildrakizumab versus Guselkumab

BACKGROUND: Psoriasis is a chronic inflammatory skin condition that impacts quality of life and requires long-term treatment and effective symptom management. Interleukin-23 (IL-23) has emerged as a key player in the pathogenesis of psoriasis and tildrakizumab and guselkumab are both immunomodulator...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Du Jardin, Kristian Garn, Hurtado Lopez, Pepi, Lange, Mette, McCool, Rachael, Maeso Naval, Silvia, Quickert, Sandra
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Columbia Data Analytics, LLC 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7398610/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32766377
http://dx.doi.org/10.36469/jheor.2020.13671
_version_ 1783565988400201728
author Du Jardin, Kristian Garn
Hurtado Lopez, Pepi
Lange, Mette
McCool, Rachael
Maeso Naval, Silvia
Quickert, Sandra
author_facet Du Jardin, Kristian Garn
Hurtado Lopez, Pepi
Lange, Mette
McCool, Rachael
Maeso Naval, Silvia
Quickert, Sandra
author_sort Du Jardin, Kristian Garn
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Psoriasis is a chronic inflammatory skin condition that impacts quality of life and requires long-term treatment and effective symptom management. Interleukin-23 (IL-23) has emerged as a key player in the pathogenesis of psoriasis and tildrakizumab and guselkumab are both immunomodulatory agents that inhibit the p19 subunit of IL-23. In its pivotal Phase III trial, tildrakizumab demonstrated greater efficacy than etanercept in moderate-to-severe psoriasis. However, there are no head-to-head trials comparing tildrakizumab with guselkumab. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature review and Bucher indirect comparison of tildrakizumab and guselkumab, using placebo as a common comparator. We searched MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, MEDLINE(R) Daily Epub Ahead of Print, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for Phase III randomized controlled trials between 1946 and November 2018. Inclusion criteria were adult patients ≥18 years with moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis, and intervention with tildrakizumab or guselkumab compared to placebo or best supportive care. Outcomes included were severity of psoriasis as defined by the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 75 and PASI 90, frequency of serious adverse events (SAEs), and treatment discontinuations. Outcomes were evaluated at Weeks 12 to 16 and 24 to 28. Analysis was based on the intent-to-treat population and, for all outcomes, the number of events reported were analyzed as a proportion of the number of patients randomized to ensure consistency across trials. RESULTS: Overall, 154 unique records were identified. Five studies met the eligibility criteria and were included in the analysis; two tildrakizumab trials (reSURFACE 1 and reSURFACE 2) and three guselkumab trials (VOYAGE 1, VOYAGE 2, and a Japanese study). There was no statistically significant difference between guselkumab and tildrakizumab for PASI 75, PASI 90, SAEs, and rate of discontinuations at either timepoint. CONCLUSION: This study assessed the comparative efficacy of tildrakizumab and guselkumab for the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis. Limitations included the limited number of publications, imputation of placebo arm values for Weeks 24 to 28, and limited relevance of the Japanese study. This indirect comparison does not provide evidence that one treatment is superior to the other.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7398610
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Columbia Data Analytics, LLC
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73986102020-08-05 A Systematic Literature Review and Bucher Indirect Comparison: Tildrakizumab versus Guselkumab Du Jardin, Kristian Garn Hurtado Lopez, Pepi Lange, Mette McCool, Rachael Maeso Naval, Silvia Quickert, Sandra J Health Econ Outcomes Res Dermatological Diseases BACKGROUND: Psoriasis is a chronic inflammatory skin condition that impacts quality of life and requires long-term treatment and effective symptom management. Interleukin-23 (IL-23) has emerged as a key player in the pathogenesis of psoriasis and tildrakizumab and guselkumab are both immunomodulatory agents that inhibit the p19 subunit of IL-23. In its pivotal Phase III trial, tildrakizumab demonstrated greater efficacy than etanercept in moderate-to-severe psoriasis. However, there are no head-to-head trials comparing tildrakizumab with guselkumab. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature review and Bucher indirect comparison of tildrakizumab and guselkumab, using placebo as a common comparator. We searched MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, MEDLINE(R) Daily Epub Ahead of Print, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for Phase III randomized controlled trials between 1946 and November 2018. Inclusion criteria were adult patients ≥18 years with moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis, and intervention with tildrakizumab or guselkumab compared to placebo or best supportive care. Outcomes included were severity of psoriasis as defined by the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 75 and PASI 90, frequency of serious adverse events (SAEs), and treatment discontinuations. Outcomes were evaluated at Weeks 12 to 16 and 24 to 28. Analysis was based on the intent-to-treat population and, for all outcomes, the number of events reported were analyzed as a proportion of the number of patients randomized to ensure consistency across trials. RESULTS: Overall, 154 unique records were identified. Five studies met the eligibility criteria and were included in the analysis; two tildrakizumab trials (reSURFACE 1 and reSURFACE 2) and three guselkumab trials (VOYAGE 1, VOYAGE 2, and a Japanese study). There was no statistically significant difference between guselkumab and tildrakizumab for PASI 75, PASI 90, SAEs, and rate of discontinuations at either timepoint. CONCLUSION: This study assessed the comparative efficacy of tildrakizumab and guselkumab for the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis. Limitations included the limited number of publications, imputation of placebo arm values for Weeks 24 to 28, and limited relevance of the Japanese study. This indirect comparison does not provide evidence that one treatment is superior to the other. Columbia Data Analytics, LLC 2020-07-24 /pmc/articles/PMC7398610/ /pubmed/32766377 http://dx.doi.org/10.36469/jheor.2020.13671 Text en This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CCBY-4.0). View this license’s legal deed at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 and legal code at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode for more information.
spellingShingle Dermatological Diseases
Du Jardin, Kristian Garn
Hurtado Lopez, Pepi
Lange, Mette
McCool, Rachael
Maeso Naval, Silvia
Quickert, Sandra
A Systematic Literature Review and Bucher Indirect Comparison: Tildrakizumab versus Guselkumab
title A Systematic Literature Review and Bucher Indirect Comparison: Tildrakizumab versus Guselkumab
title_full A Systematic Literature Review and Bucher Indirect Comparison: Tildrakizumab versus Guselkumab
title_fullStr A Systematic Literature Review and Bucher Indirect Comparison: Tildrakizumab versus Guselkumab
title_full_unstemmed A Systematic Literature Review and Bucher Indirect Comparison: Tildrakizumab versus Guselkumab
title_short A Systematic Literature Review and Bucher Indirect Comparison: Tildrakizumab versus Guselkumab
title_sort systematic literature review and bucher indirect comparison: tildrakizumab versus guselkumab
topic Dermatological Diseases
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7398610/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32766377
http://dx.doi.org/10.36469/jheor.2020.13671
work_keys_str_mv AT dujardinkristiangarn asystematicliteraturereviewandbucherindirectcomparisontildrakizumabversusguselkumab
AT hurtadolopezpepi asystematicliteraturereviewandbucherindirectcomparisontildrakizumabversusguselkumab
AT langemette asystematicliteraturereviewandbucherindirectcomparisontildrakizumabversusguselkumab
AT mccoolrachael asystematicliteraturereviewandbucherindirectcomparisontildrakizumabversusguselkumab
AT maesonavalsilvia asystematicliteraturereviewandbucherindirectcomparisontildrakizumabversusguselkumab
AT quickertsandra asystematicliteraturereviewandbucherindirectcomparisontildrakizumabversusguselkumab
AT dujardinkristiangarn systematicliteraturereviewandbucherindirectcomparisontildrakizumabversusguselkumab
AT hurtadolopezpepi systematicliteraturereviewandbucherindirectcomparisontildrakizumabversusguselkumab
AT langemette systematicliteraturereviewandbucherindirectcomparisontildrakizumabversusguselkumab
AT mccoolrachael systematicliteraturereviewandbucherindirectcomparisontildrakizumabversusguselkumab
AT maesonavalsilvia systematicliteraturereviewandbucherindirectcomparisontildrakizumabversusguselkumab
AT quickertsandra systematicliteraturereviewandbucherindirectcomparisontildrakizumabversusguselkumab