Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31369575›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2019

Cardiovascular safety of tocilizumab: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Benjamin Castagné, Marie Viprey, Julie Martin, Anne-Marie Schott, Michel Cucherat, Martin Soubrier

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic ReviewNetwork Meta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

45 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 77 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Tocilizumab for severe and refractory mucous membrane pemphigoid.Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Therapeutic Antibodies in Medicine.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Benjamin CastagnéRheumatology Department, Gabriel-Montpied University Hospital, Clermont-Ferrand, France.ORCID 0000-0002-4588-8651
Marie VipreyHESPER EA 7425, University of Lyon, Claude Bernard University Lyon 1, Lyon, France.
Julie MartinHESPER EA 7425, University of Lyon, Claude Bernard University Lyon 1, Lyon, France.
Anne-Marie SchottHESPER EA 7425, University of Lyon, Claude Bernard University Lyon 1, Lyon, France.
Michel CucheratUniversity Lyon, UMR 5558, Laboratory of Biometry and Evolutionary Biology, CNRS, Villeurbanne, France.
Martin SoubrierRheumatology Department, Gabriel-Montpied University Hospital, Clermont-Ferrand, France.
Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1 · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Clermont-Ferrand · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesOur objective was to compare the cardiovascular safety of tocilizumab and other biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARD) in rheumatoid arthritis using a network meta-analysis (NMA).

methodsA systematic literature search through May 2018 identified randomized controlled trials (RCT) or observational studies (cohort only) reporting cardiovascular outcomes of tocilizumab (TCZ) and/or abatacept (ABA) and/or rituximab (RTX) and/or tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) in rheumatoid arthritis patients. The composite primary outcome was the rate of major adverse cardiovascular outcomes (MACE, myocardial infarction (MI), peripheral artery disease (PAD) and cardiac heart failure (CHF)).

results19 studies were included in the NMA, including 11 RCTs and 8 cohort studies. We found less events with RTX (5.41 [1.70;17.26]. We found no difference between TCZ and other treatments. Concerning MI, we found no difference between TCZ and csDMARD (4.23 [0.22;80.64]), no difference between TCZ and TNFi (2.00 [0.18;21.84]). There was no difference between TCZ and csDMARD (1.51[0.02;103.50] and between TCZ and TNFi (1.00 [0.06;15.85]) for stroke event. With cohorts and RCT NMA, we found no difference between TCZ and other treatments for MACE (0.66 [0.42;1.03] with ABA, 1.04 [0.60;1.81] with RTX, 0.78[0.53;1.16] and 0.91 [0.54;1.51] with csDMARD), but the risk of myocardial infarction was lower with TCZ compared to ABA (0.67 [0.47;0.97]). We lacked data to compare TCZ and other bDMARD for stoke and MI. Not enough data was available to perform a NMA for CHF and PAD.

conclusionsDespite an increase in cholesterol levels, TCZ has safe cardiovascular outcomes compared to other bDMARD.

Indexed as

Antibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAntirheumatic AgentsArthritis, RheumatoidCardiovascular DiseasesHumansPatient SafetyPrognosisAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAntirheumatic Agentstocilizumab

Identifiers

PMID31369575
PMCPMC6675055
OpenAlexW2966516181

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.