ArticleJournal of comparative effectiveness research2026
Indirect treatment comparison of iptacopan versus pegcetacoplan for patients with paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria and residual anemia despite C5 inhibitor treatment.
Article in Journal of comparative effectiveness research, 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.
- Anchored Indirect Treatment Comparison Finds Comparable Effects of Pegcetacoplan and Iptacopan in Paroxysmal Nocturnal Haemoglobinuria.European journal of haematology · 2025Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study conducted an indirect treatment comparison (ITC) of iptacopan, the first oral monotherapy targeting factor B, versus pegcetacoplan, a subcutaneous infusion targeting complement component 3, in patients with paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH) and residual anemia despite complement component 5 inhibitors (C5i). An unanchored matching adjusted ITC was performed, using phase III APPLY-PNH and PEGASUS studies, identified by a systematic literature review. The outcomes were: change from baseline (CfB) in hemoglobin (Hb), with and without post-transfusion data, CfB in lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), CfB in Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)-Fatigue score, transfusion avoidance, and serious adverse events. Two adjustment scenarios were analyzed: (A) baseline Hb, sex, transfusion history ≤12 months, and (B) scenario A plus reticulocyte count, baseline LDH and age. After matching and adjusting, baseline characteristics were similar across trials. Iptacopan showed greater Hb improvements than pegcetacoplan with post-transfusion data (mean difference - scenario A: 1.05 g/dl; p < 0.001, scenario B: 0.76 g/dl; p = 0.018) and without (A: 1.31 g/dl; p < 0.001, B: 1.01 g/dl; p = 0.014). Odds of transfusion avoidance were higher with iptacopan (A: odds ratio [OR] = 9.17, p = 0.013; B: OR = 12.71, p = 0.009). No significant difference was noted in CfB in LDH and FACIT-Fatigue score. These findings suggest that iptacopan may improve Hb levels and reduce transfusion dependency compared with pegcetacoplan in PNH patients with residual anemia despite C5i and must be interpreted in the context of ITCs.
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.