Efficacy and safety of medications for antihistamine-refractory chronic spontaneous urticaria: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
Abstract
Summary Purpose Most medications for antihistamine-refractory chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) have not been compared head-to-head. This systematic review and network meta-analysis evaluates their relative efficacy and safety. Methods Electronic databases were searched until 05 May 2022 for randomized controlled trials investigating systemic medications for antihistamine-refractory CSU. The change in the urticaria activity score over seven days (UAS7) and occurrence of adverse events were compared between treatments using random-effects network meta-analysis models. Results In all, 32 studies with 3641 patients receiving 31 different systemic medical interventions were included. Among currently available drugs, omalizumab 300 mg injected every 4 weeks and cyclosporine 3–5 mg/kg daily per os were most effective in reducing the UAS7 with a reduction of −10.45 (95% confidence interval [CI]: −12.35, −8.55) and of −10.40 (95% CI: −19.4, −1.4) compared to placebo. Similar efficacies were shown by the nonapproved agents ligelizumab 72 mg injected every 4 weeks (−11.67, 95% CI: −16.80, −7.15) and fenebrutinib 400 mg daily per os (−9.50, 95% CI: −17.56, −1.44). The odds ratio for the occurrence of an adverse event with placebo as comparator was 1.09 for omalizumab (95% CI: 0.83, 1.42), 2.16 for cyclosporine (95% CI: 0.77, 6.07: GRADE; moderate certainty), 0.89 for ligelizumab (95% CI: 0.47, 1.69), and 2.14 for fenebrutinib (95% CI: 0.62, 7.38) in the mentioned dosages. Conclusion…
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 3,641 participants or records.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Artificial Intelligence in Medicine: Cross-Sectional Study Among Medical Students on Application, Education, and Ethical Aspects
- Information quality of videos related to esophageal cancer on tiktok, kwai, and bilibili: a cross-sectional study
- The quality and reliability of short videos about hypertension on TikTok: a cross-sectional study
- Quality and reliability evaluation of pancreatic cancer-related video content on social short video platforms: a cross-sectional study
- Quality and reliability of pediatric pneumonia related short videos on mainstream platforms: cross-sectional study
- Association between metabolic score for insulin resistance (METS-IR) and hypertension: a cross-sectional study based on NHANES 2007–2018
Go deeper in Evidence Hub
Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.