Canakinumab vs triamcinolone acetonide: Global assessment of treatment success
Canakinumab probably leads to higher participant global assessment of response to treatment: good or… compared with triamcinolone acetonide (moderate certainty).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Canakinumab vs triamcinolone acetonide Participant global assessment of response to treatment: good or excellent at 72 hours (canakinumab 150 mg) Assessed by the participant on a 5‐point Likert scale (excellent, good, acceptable, slight or poor) · acute gout Canakinumab probably leads to higher participant global assessment of response to treatment: good or… compared with triamcinolone acetonide (moderate certainty). Interleukin‐1 inhibitors for acute gout (2014) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 1.37 [1.16, 1.61] | 3 studies · 478 participants | Moderate |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Interleukin‐1 inhibitors for acute gout 2014 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.