Would you like to see your presentation here, made available to a global audience of researchers?
Add your own presentation or have us affordably record your next conference.
Background: Psoriasis treatments have been historically used to maintain relapsing and remitting symptoms of psoriasis, notably through corticosteroids, vitamin D analogs, calcineurin inhibitors, and coal tar, salicylic acid and retinoid therapies. Newer monoclonal antibodies risankizumab, an IL-23 inhibitor, and bimekizumab, an IL-17A and IL-17F inhibitor, have recently been FDA approved as treatment modalities in Phase 3 clinical trials. In terms of efficacy, the UltMMa-1 and UltMMa-2, IMMhance, and IMMvent clinical trials found 75-80% of patients with Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 90 (PASI 90) with Risankizumab use after 16 weeks, correlated with a 90% reduction in symptoms. Bimekizumab showed similar results in the BE VIVID, BE READY, BE SURE, and BE RADIANT trials showing 85% of patients achieving PASI90.3, 4This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate efficacy and safety of risankizumab and bimekizumab in comparison to standard of care to evaluate more recent treatments for psoriasis and elucidate their potential role in clinical practice.
Methods: This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) and registered to PROSPERO(CRD420251053258). A total of 10,336 articles utilizing monoclonal antibodies were retrieved from Scopus, Embase, and PubMed databases. Articles were included if patients were receiving either bimekizumab or risankizumab for the treatment of psoriasis or psoriasis subtype and 22 articles were abstracted, using Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool to assess quality.
Results: Twenty-two studies with a total of 6,237 patients were included. Eleven studies analyzed 2,148 patients treated with bimekizumab and a separate eleven studies analyzed 1,919 patients treated with risankizumab. Bimekizumab and risankizumab were similarly effective in treating psoriasis as measured by the PASI 90, the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), and the Investigator’s Global Assessment (IGA). However, bimekizumab was found to have a significantly higher risk of any adverse event compared to the control. Risankizumab was found to have a significantly decreased risk of severe adverse events compared to the control. All other endpoints of this meta-analysis regarding adverse events were not found to be significant (p >0.05).
Conclusion: Based on systematic review and meta-analysis of risankizumab and bimekizumab’s efficacy and safety compared to standard of care, bimekizumab’s significantly higher rate of any adverse event and risankizumab’s significantly decreased risk of severe adverse events may serve as crucial pieces of information to guide clinicians choosing potential therapeutics for psoriasis treatment.
