Cycling versus swapping strategies for treatment of psoriatic arthritis after primary tumor necrosis factor inhibitors failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Clicks: 3
ID: 315406
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #206 of 219 articles by views in Lara D. Veeken

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 219 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) are widely used to treat moderate to severe psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Tumor necrosis factor inhibitors-TNFi are the most common initial biologic owing to their long market availability, clinician familiarity, and lower cost. However, the optimal strategy following TNFi failure, cycling to another TNFi or swapping to a bDMARD with a different mechanism, remains uncertain. This meta-analysis compared both strategies in these patients. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central were searched for RCTs and observational studies comparing cycling with swapping in PsA. Outcomes included: (1) lack of response; (2) 12-month retention; (3) 24-month retention; and (4) adverse events. Pooled risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. RESULTS: Five observational studies, including 2,300 PsA patients, were analyzed; 1,517 (66.0%) received cycling, and 783 (34.0%) received swapping strategies. Disease duration before the second bDMARD ranged from 3.7-12 years. The main cause of discontinuation of the first TNFi before switching was lack of response (including primary non-response and secondary loss of response) according to individual study definitions. No significant differences were observed between groups for lack of response (RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.70-1.41; I2=92%), 12-month retention (RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.75-1.10; I2=79%), 24-month retention (RR 0.96; 95% CI 0.53-1.75; I2=94%), or adverse events (RR 0.94; 95% CI 0.38-2.34; I2=71%). CONCLUSION: Following TNFi failure, cycling and swapping strategies show comparable retention and safety, suggesting that treatment choice may be guided by clinical characteristics and patient preference rather than clear differences in overall effectiveness.
Reference Key
openalex_W7162850808 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Assaina T J Tomo, Piyush Ratan, Lívian de S Gonçalves, Tatiana C Marques, Maria E C Souza, Laura Carbonera Finn, Juliana de Abreu Abdalla Rima, Gabriela Stutz Francisco Moreira
Journal Lara D. Veeken
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/rheumatology/keag281
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/rheumatology/keag281
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.