Skip to main content
. 2021 Apr 19;2021(4):CD011535. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011535.pub4

Comparison 2. Primary outcome ‐ serious adverse events (SAE).

Outcome or subgroup title No. of studies No. of participants Statistical method Effect size
2.1 Non‐biological treatments versus placebo 4 1023 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 0.39 [0.09, 1.70]
2.1.1 Methotrexate versus placebo 3 319 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 0.16 [0.03, 0.88]
2.1.2 Fumaric acid esters versus placebo 1 704 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 0.83 [0.31, 2.21]
2.2 Non‐biological treatment 1 versus non‐biological treatment 2 1   Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) Subtotals only
2.2.1 Methotrexate versus fumaric ester acids 1 108 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 0.33 [0.04, 3.10]
2.3 Anti‐TNF alpha versus placebo 32 10454 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 1.07 [0.77, 1.49]
2.3.1 Etanercept versus placebo 13 4265 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 0.92 [0.53, 1.60]
2.3.2 Adalimumab versus placebo 10 3485 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 1.15 [0.72, 1.84]
2.3.3 Certolizumab versus placebo 4 1026 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 1.19 [0.19, 7.50]
2.3.4 Infliximab versus placebo 6 1678 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 1.99 [0.82, 4.78]
2.4 Anti‐IL12/23 versus placebo 11 4596 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 0.96 [0.59, 1.54]
2.4.1 Ustekinumab versus placebo 11 4596 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 0.96 [0.59, 1.54]
2.5 Anti‐IL17 versus placebo 21 10987 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 0.99 [0.72, 1.36]
2.5.1 Secukinumab versus placebo 11 3360 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 0.99 [0.59, 1.66]
2.5.2 Ixekizumab versus placebo 4 3268 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 1.16 [0.63, 2.13]
2.5.3 Brodalumab versus placebo 5 4109 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 0.92 [0.52, 1.61]
2.5.4 Bimekizumab versus placebo 1 250 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 0.20 [0.01, 3.16]
2.6 Anti‐IL23 versus placebo 14 5882 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 0.76 [0.50, 1.16]
2.6.1 Guselkumab versus placebo 5 1767 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 1.07 [0.50, 2.28]
2.6.2 Tildrakizumab versus placebo 3 1904 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 1.01 [0.37, 2.77]
2.6.3 Risankizumab versus placebo 4 1476 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 0.71 [0.24, 2.10]
2.6.4 Mirikizumab versus placebo 2 735 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 0.65 [0.17, 2.48]
2.7 Biologic versus non‐biological treatments 10   Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) Subtotals only
2.7.1 Etanercept versus acitretin 3 142 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 0.30 [0.01, 7.02]
2.7.2 Infliximab versus methotrexate 1 868 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 2.41 [1.04, 5.59]
2.7.3 Adalimumab versus methotrexate 1 218 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 2.04 [0.19, 22.14]
2.7.4 Secukinumab versus fumaric acid esters 1 202 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 0.53 [0.16, 1.75]
2.7.5 Ixekizumab versus fumaric ester acids 1 108 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 0.33 [0.04, 3.10]
2.7.6 Ixekizumab versus methotrexate 1 108 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 1.00 [0.06, 15.58]
2.7.7 Guselkumab versus fumaric ester acids 1 119 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 1.48 [0.26, 8.51]
2.7.8 Risankizumab versus fumaric ester acids 1 120 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 0.50 [0.05, 5.37]
2.7.9 Brodalumab versus fumaric acid esters 1 300 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 3.00 [0.32, 28.52]
2.8 Biologic 1 versus biologic 2 21   Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) Subtotals only
2.8.1 Ustekinumab versus etanercept 1 903 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 1.25 [0.38, 4.11]
2.8.2 Secukinumab versus etanercept 1 980 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 1.08 [0.41, 2.82]
2.8.3 Infliximab versus etanercept 1 48 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 0.92 [0.06, 13.87]
2.8.4 Ixekizumab versus etanercept 2 2209 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 1.07 [0.55, 2.06]
2.8.5 Tildrakizumab versus etanercept 1 934 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 0.72 [0.28, 1.87]
2.8.6 Certolizumab versus etanercept 1 502 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 2.56 [0.30, 21.74]
2.8.7 Secukinumab versus ustekinumab 2 1778 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 1.26 [0.70, 2.30]
2.8.8 Ixekizumab versus ustekinumab 1 302 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 6.09 [0.30, 125.89]
2.8.9 Brodalumab versus ustekinumab 2 3088 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 1.51 [0.64, 3.56]
2.8.10 Risankizumab versus ustekinumab 3 965 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 0.57 [0.24, 1.32]
2.8.11 Guselkumab versus adalimumab 3 1658 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 0.91 [0.45, 1.84]
2.8.12 Risankizumab versus adalimumab 1 605 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 1.12 [0.46, 2.72]
2.8.13 Ixekizumab versus guselkumab 1 1027 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 1.20 [0.58, 2.47]
2.8.14 Risankizumab versus secukinumab 1 327 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 1.49 [0.54, 4.09]
2.9 Small molecules versus placebo 15 5982 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 0.93 [0.61, 1.43]
2.9.1 Apremilast versus placebo 7 2593 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 0.85 [0.48, 1.52]
2.9.2 Tofacitinib versus placebo 7 3122 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 1.09 [0.57, 2.11]
2.9.3 TYK2 versus placebo 1 267 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 0.61 [0.06, 5.71]
2.10 Biologic versus small molecules 2   Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) Subtotals only
2.10.1 Etanercept versus tofacitinib 1 998 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 1.15 [0.46, 2.89]
2.10.2 Etanercept versus apremilast 1 166 Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) 0.33 [0.04, 3.14]