Efficacy and Safety of Ligelizumab in Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q2 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Clinical Drug Investigation Pub Date : 2025-05-01 Epub Date: 2025-04-04 DOI:10.1007/s40261-025-01436-9
Ana Carolina Putini Vieira, Ana Carolina Ventura de Santana de Jesus, Anelise Poluboiarinov Cappellaro, Lucas M Barbosa, Ana Clara Felix de Farias Santos, Carolina Mira Dilly de Medeiros, Mable Pereira, Gabriel Gomes Lopes, Fernanda Valeriano Zamora
{"title":"Efficacy and Safety of Ligelizumab in Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.","authors":"Ana Carolina Putini Vieira, Ana Carolina Ventura de Santana de Jesus, Anelise Poluboiarinov Cappellaro, Lucas M Barbosa, Ana Clara Felix de Farias Santos, Carolina Mira Dilly de Medeiros, Mable Pereira, Gabriel Gomes Lopes, Fernanda Valeriano Zamora","doi":"10.1007/s40261-025-01436-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: This meta-analysis aims to evaluate ligelizumab's efficacy and safety for chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) treatment by analyzing recent clinical trials and comparing it with placebo and omalizumab.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane were searched up to October 2024. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ligelizumab with placebo or omalizumab, reporting relevant outcomes. Nonrandomized studies, or those without control groups, were excluded. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB-2 tool, and the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations approach rated evidence certainty. Statistical analysis used R software (v.4.4.2), assessing heterogeneity by Cochran Q and I<sup>2</sup> statistics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Four RCTs with 2488 patients were included. Ligelizumab (< 72 mg) significantly improved itch severity score over 7 days (ISS7) [risk ratio (RR) 5.07; 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.12-8.24; prediction interval (PI) 2.31-11.15; P < 0.01; I<sup>2</sup> = 0%], urticaria activity score over 7 days (UAS7) (RR 4.61; 95% CI 1.84-11.59; PI 0.34-62.49; P < 0.01; I<sup>2</sup> = 55%), and overall urticaria activity (RR 4.26; 95% CI 2.63-6.92; PI 0.18-98.29; P < 0.01; I<sup>2</sup> = 0%) versus placebo. The > 72 mg dose showed greater improvements in ISS7 (RR 5.12; 95% CI 2.72-9.64; PI 1.14-22.96; P < 0.01; I<sup>2</sup> = 45%), UAS7 (RR 5.35; 95% CI 3.04-9.40; PI 1.78-16.08; P < 0.01; I<sup>2</sup> = 31%), and overall activity (RR 4.34; 95% CI 2.67-7.04; PI 0.19-99.80; P < 0.01; I<sup>2</sup> = 0%). Compared with ligelizumab (> 72 mg), omalizumab had fewer injection site reactions (RR 3.04; 95% CI 1.95-4.73; PI 0.17-53.81; P < 0.01; I<sup>2</sup> = 0%) and erythema (RR 5.05; 95% CI 1.33-19.13; PI 0.08-312.57; P = 0.02; I<sup>2</sup> = 17%). Moderate certainty evidence indicated that ≤ 72 mg probably improved ISS7, overall urticaria activity, and UAS7. For > 72 mg, improvements in overall urticaria activity were seen, but ISS7 and UAS7 were classified as low quality of evidence.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Ligelizumab significantly improves CSU symptoms compared with placebo, reducing disease severity, itching, and hives, with similar safety to omalizumab. Ligelizumab's higher affinity for immunoglobulin E (IgE) may provide better symptom control. Limitations include a small number of studies, short follow-up periods, and patient variability.</p><p><strong>Protocol registration: </strong>International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), CRD42024593072.</p>","PeriodicalId":10402,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Drug Investigation","volume":" ","pages":"235-245"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Drug Investigation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40261-025-01436-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: This meta-analysis aims to evaluate ligelizumab's efficacy and safety for chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) treatment by analyzing recent clinical trials and comparing it with placebo and omalizumab.

Methods: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane were searched up to October 2024. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ligelizumab with placebo or omalizumab, reporting relevant outcomes. Nonrandomized studies, or those without control groups, were excluded. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB-2 tool, and the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations approach rated evidence certainty. Statistical analysis used R software (v.4.4.2), assessing heterogeneity by Cochran Q and I2 statistics.

Results: Four RCTs with 2488 patients were included. Ligelizumab (< 72 mg) significantly improved itch severity score over 7 days (ISS7) [risk ratio (RR) 5.07; 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.12-8.24; prediction interval (PI) 2.31-11.15; P < 0.01; I2 = 0%], urticaria activity score over 7 days (UAS7) (RR 4.61; 95% CI 1.84-11.59; PI 0.34-62.49; P < 0.01; I2 = 55%), and overall urticaria activity (RR 4.26; 95% CI 2.63-6.92; PI 0.18-98.29; P < 0.01; I2 = 0%) versus placebo. The > 72 mg dose showed greater improvements in ISS7 (RR 5.12; 95% CI 2.72-9.64; PI 1.14-22.96; P < 0.01; I2 = 45%), UAS7 (RR 5.35; 95% CI 3.04-9.40; PI 1.78-16.08; P < 0.01; I2 = 31%), and overall activity (RR 4.34; 95% CI 2.67-7.04; PI 0.19-99.80; P < 0.01; I2 = 0%). Compared with ligelizumab (> 72 mg), omalizumab had fewer injection site reactions (RR 3.04; 95% CI 1.95-4.73; PI 0.17-53.81; P < 0.01; I2 = 0%) and erythema (RR 5.05; 95% CI 1.33-19.13; PI 0.08-312.57; P = 0.02; I2 = 17%). Moderate certainty evidence indicated that ≤ 72 mg probably improved ISS7, overall urticaria activity, and UAS7. For > 72 mg, improvements in overall urticaria activity were seen, but ISS7 and UAS7 were classified as low quality of evidence.

Discussion: Ligelizumab significantly improves CSU symptoms compared with placebo, reducing disease severity, itching, and hives, with similar safety to omalizumab. Ligelizumab's higher affinity for immunoglobulin E (IgE) may provide better symptom control. Limitations include a small number of studies, short follow-up periods, and patient variability.

Protocol registration: International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), CRD42024593072.

利利珠单抗治疗慢性自发性荨麻疹的疗效和安全性:随机对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析。
背景与目的:本荟萃分析旨在通过分析最近的临床试验,并将其与安慰剂和omalizumab进行比较,评估利利珠单抗治疗慢性自发性荨麻疹(CSU)的有效性和安全性。方法:检索至2024年10月的PubMed、Embase和Cochrane数据库。符合条件的研究是随机对照试验(rct),比较利利珠单抗与安慰剂或奥玛珠单抗,报告相关结果。非随机研究或没有对照组的研究被排除在外。使用Cochrane rob2工具评估偏倚风险,采用推荐、评估、发展和评价分级方法评估证据确定性。统计分析采用R软件(v.4.4.2),采用Cochran Q和I2统计量评估异质性。结果:纳入4项随机对照试验,共2488例患者。利利珠单抗(2 = 0%),荨麻疹活动评分超过7天(UAS7) (RR 4.61;95% ci 1.84-11.59;π0.34 - -62.49;P 2 = 55%),总体荨麻疹活动性(RR 4.26;95% ci 2.63-6.92;π0.18 - -98.29;P 2 = 0%)。> 72 mg剂量对ISS7的改善更大(RR 5.12;95% ci 2.72-9.64;π1.14 - -22.96;P = 45%), P = 7 (rr 5.35;95% ci 3.04-9.40;π1.78 - -16.08;P 2 = 31%),总体活动(RR 4.34;95% ci 2.67-7.04;π0.19 - -99.80;p 2 = 0%)。与利利珠单抗相比,omalizumab的注射部位反应较少(RR 3.04;95% ci 1.95-4.73;π0.17 - -53.81;P 2 = 0%)和红斑(RR 5.05;95% ci 1.33-19.13;π0.08 - -312.57;p = 0.02;i2 = 17%)。中等确定性证据表明≤72 mg可能改善ISS7、整体荨麻疹活性和UAS7。对于bbb72 mg,整体荨麻疹活性有所改善,但ISS7和UAS7被归类为低质量证据。讨论:与安慰剂相比,利利珠单抗可显著改善CSU症状,降低疾病严重程度、瘙痒和荨麻疹,安全性与奥玛珠单抗相似。利利珠单抗对免疫球蛋白E (IgE)的高亲和力可能提供更好的症状控制。局限性包括研究数量少、随访时间短以及患者的可变性。方案注册:国际前瞻性系统评价注册(PROSPERO), CRD42024593072。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
3.10%
发文量
108
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical Drug Investigation provides rapid publication of original research covering all phases of clinical drug development and therapeutic use of drugs. The Journal includes: -Clinical trials, outcomes research, clinical pharmacoeconomic studies and pharmacoepidemiology studies with a strong link to optimum prescribing practice for a drug or group of drugs. -Clinical pharmacodynamic and clinical pharmacokinetic studies with a strong link to clinical practice. -Pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic studies in healthy volunteers in which significant implications for clinical prescribing are discussed. -Studies focusing on the application of drug delivery technology in healthcare. -Short communications and case study reports that meet the above criteria will also be considered. Additional digital features (including animated abstracts, video abstracts, slide decks, audio slides, instructional videos, infographics, podcasts and animations) can be published with articles; these are designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. In addition, articles published in Clinical Drug Investigation may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist readers who have some knowledge, but non in-depth expertise in, the area to understand important medical advances.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信