Risk of malignancies in patients with spondyloarthritis treated with biologics compared with those treated with non-biologics: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The aim of our study was to synthesize evidence on the occurrence of malignancy in spondyloarthritis (SpA), from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing biologics with non-biologics and biologics to each other. METHODS: We systematically searched Medline, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Scopus and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception until 31 October 2018. RCTs with ⩾24-week follow-up were included. We extracted data using standardized forms and assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. We performed pair-wise meta-analyses and network meta-analyses to compare the risk of malignancy for each biologics class and SpA type. We reported the Peto odds ratio (OR) of any malignancy along with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Bayesian posterior probabilities comparing risk of malignancy of each biologic class with non-biologics were computed as supplementary measures. RESULTS: Fifty-four trials were included; most (44/54) had follow-up <1 year. Among 14,245 patients, 63 developed a malignancy. While most Peto ORs were >1, they had wide 95% CI and p >0.05. The overall Peto OR comparing biologics with non-biologics was 1.42 (95% CI 0.80-2.53). Only interleukin-17 inhibitors in peripheral SpA had p <0.05 (Peto OR 2.77, 95% CI 1.07-7.13); the posterior probability that the risk was higher than non-biologics was 98%. Stratified analyses revealed no consistent trend by prior exposure to biologics, duration of follow-up, study quality, study-arm crossover, analytical approaches and type of malignancy. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate no overall elevated risk of malignancy with biologics in SpA. As our meta-analyses are unable to conclude on the long-term risk, long-term pharmacovigilance of biologics in SpA may still be warranted.

Duke Scholars

Author Truls Ostbye Family Medicine and Community Health