ReviewEJHaem2026
Comparative Efficacy of Complement Inhibitors in Complement Inhibitor-Naïve PNH: A Systematic Review With Supportive Exploratory Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials.
Review in EJHaem, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Paroxysmal nocturnal haemoglobinuria (PNH) is an uncommon, life-threatening disease, caused by intravascular haemolysis by the complement system. In this review, we aim to compare the efficacy of the available agents across patient-centred outcomes in complement inhibitor-naive patients. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, a comprehensive literature search was conducted on PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL and ClinicalTrials.gov for studies published up to 30th May 2025. A frequentist model network meta-analyses were conducted in RStudio (v5.4.1) using a common-effects model. Results: A total of four randomized controlled trials evaluating four complement inhibitor agents (ravulizumab, crovalimab, eculizumab and pegcetacoplan) were included in this systematic review and network meta-analysis, involving 589 complement inhibitor-naïve adults with PNH. Across outcomes, all active treatments demonstrated benefit compared with placebo or supportive care. In the exploratory network meta-analysis of transfusion avoidance, no consistent statistically significant differences were observed between active treatments, although ravulizumab showed higher odds compared with crovalimab (OR = 2.69, 95% CI: 1.13-6.41; Conclusion: This study suggests that available complement inhibitors improve key outcomes versus placebo/supportive care in complement inhibitors naive PNH. However, the evidence network is sparse (four trials) and the cross-trial differences limit reliable inference regarding relative efficacy between active agents. Comparative findings should be interpreted as hypothesis-generating.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.