Indirect comparisons of ixekizumab versus three interleukin-23 p19 inhibitors in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis – efficacy findings up to week 12

References

• Sbidian E, Chaimani A, Garcia-Doval I, et al. Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;12:CD011535.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee EB, Amin M, Bhutani T, et al. Emerging therapies in psoriasis: a systematic review. Cutis. 2018;101(3S):5–9.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Griffiths CE, Reich K, Lebwohl M, et al. UNCOVER-2 and UNCOVER-3 investigators. Comparison of ixekizumab with etanercept or placebo in moderate-to-severe psoriasis (UNCOVER-2 and UNCOVER-3): results from two phase 3 randomised trials. Lancet. 2015;386(9993):541–551.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gordon KB, Blauvelt A, Papp KA, et al. UNCOVER-1 study group; UNCOVER-2 study group; UNCOVER-3 study group. Phase 3 trials of ixekizumab in moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(4):345–356.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reich K, Pinter A, Lacour JP, et al.; on behalf of the IXORA-S investigators. Comparison of ixekizumab with ustekinumab in moderate-to-severe psoriasis: 24-week results from IXORA-S, a phase III study. Br J Dermatol. 2017;177(4):1014–1023.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Langley RG, Elewski BE, Lebwohl M, et al. ERASURE study group; FIXTURE study group. Secukinumab in plaque psoriasis–results of two phase 3 trials. N Engl J Med. 2014;371(4):326–338.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thaçi D, Blauvelt A, Reich K, et al. Secukinumab is superior to ustekinumab in clearing skin of subjects with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis: CLEAR, a randomized controlled trial. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2015;73(3):400–409.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Young MS, Horn EJ, Cather JC. The ACCEPT study: ustekinumab versus etanercept in moderate-to-severe psoriasis patients. Expert Rev Clin Immunol. 2011;7(1):9–13.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lebwohl M, Strober B, Menter A, et al. Phase 3 studies comparing brodalumab with ustekinumab in psoriasis. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(14):1318–1328.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gordon KB, Strober B, Lebwohl M, et al. Efficacy and safety of risankizumab in moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis (UltIMMa-1 and UltIMMa-2): results from two double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled and ustekinumab-controlled phase 3 trials. Lancet. 2018;392(10148):650–661.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reich K, Papp KA, Blauvelt A, et al. Tildrakizumab versus placebo or etanercept for chronic plaque psoriasis (reSURFACE 1 and reSURFACE 2): results from two randomised controlled, phase 3 trials. Lancet. 2017;390(10091):276–288. Erratum in: Lancet. 2017;390(10091):230.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reich K, Armstrong AW, Foley P, et al. Efficacy and safety of guselkumab, an anti-interleukin-23 monoclonal antibody, compared with adalimumab for the treatment of patients with moderate to severe psoriasis with randomized withdrawal and retreatment: Results from the phase III, double-blind, placebo- and active comparator-controlled VOYAGE 2 trial. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017;76(3):418–431.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reich K, Armstrong AW, Langley RG, et al. Guselkumab versus secukinumab for the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis (ECLIPSE): results from a phase 3, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2019;394(10201):831–839.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blauvelt A, Papp K, Gottlieb A, et al. On behalf of the IXORA-R Investigators. A head-to-head comparison of ixekizumab versus guselkumab in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis: 12-week efficacy, safety, and speed of response from a randomized, double-blinded trial. Br J Dermatol. 2019. [Epub ahead of print]. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/bjd.188511323
   Google Scholar
• Haute Autorité de Santé. Indirect comparisons. Methods and validity. July 2009. [cited 2018 Oct 11]. Available from: https://www.has-sante.fr/portail/upload/docs/application/pdf/2011-02/summary_report__indirect_comparisons_methods_and_validity_january_2011_2.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• US Preventive Services Task Force. Section 6. Methods for arriving at a recommendation. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. July 2017. [cited 2018 Oct 11]. Available from: https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/Page/Name/section-6-methods-for-arriving-at-a-recommendation.
   Google Scholar
• Laws A, Kendall R, Hawkins N. A comparison of national guidelines for network meta-analysis. Value Health. 2014;17(5):642–654.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bucher HC, Guyatt GH, Griffith LE, et al. The results of direct and indirect treatment comparisons in meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Clin Epidemiol. 1997;50(6):683–691.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Signorovitch JE, Wu EQ, Yu AP, et al. Comparative effectiveness without head-to-head trials: a method for matching-adjusted indirect comparisons applied to psoriasis treatment with adalimumab or etanercept. Pharmacoeconomics. 2010;28(10):935–945.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Phillippo DM, Ades Ae Dias S, Dias S, et al. NICE DSU technical support document 18: methods for population-adjusted indirect comparisons in submissions to NICE. Report by the Decision Support Unit. December 2016. [cited 2018 Oct 11]. Available from: http://scharr.dept.shef.ac.uk/nicedsu/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2017/05/Population-adjustment-TSD-FINAL.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Reich K, Burden AD, Eaton JN, et al. Efficacy of biologics in the treatment of moderate to severe psoriasis: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Br J Dermatol. 2012;166(1):179–188.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nash P, McInnes IB, Mease PJ, et al. Secukinumab versus adalimumab for psoriatic arthritis: Comparative effectiveness up to 48 weeks using a matching-adjusted indirect comparison. Rheumatol Ther. 2018;5(1):99–122.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strand V, Betts KA, Mittal M, et al. Comparative effectiveness of adalimumab versus secukinumab for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis: a matching-adjusted indirect comparison. Rheumatol Ther. 2017;4(2):349–362.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Warren RB, Brnabic A, Saure D, et al. Matching-adjusted indirect comparison of efficacy in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis treated with ixekizumab vs. secukinumab. Br J Dermatol. 2018;178(5):1064–1071.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blauvelt A, Papp KA, Griffiths CE, et al. Efficacy and safety of guselkumab, an anti-interleukin-23 monoclonal antibody, compared with adalimumab for the continuous treatment of patients with moderate to severe psoriasis: results from the phase III, double-blinded, placebo- and active comparator-controlled VOYAGE 1 trial. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017;76(3):405–417.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Australian Government Department of Health. Guidelines for preparing a submission to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (version 5.0). 2016. Sep [cited 2019 Jan 27]. Available from: https://pbac.pbs.gov.au/content/information/files/pbac-guidelines-version-5.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Blome C, Gosau R, Radtke MA, et al. Patient-relevant treatment goals in psoriasis. Arch Dermatol Res. 2016;308(2):69–78.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kromer C, Schaarschmidt ML, Schmieder A, et al. Patient preferences for treatment of psoriasis with biologicals: a discrete choice experiment. PLoS One. 2015;10(6):e0129120.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kiefer C, Sturtz S, Bender R. Indirect comparisons and network meta-analyses. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2015;112(47):803–808.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar