ReviewMedicine2015
Network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials: efficacy and safety of UDCA-based therapies in primary biliary cirrhosis.
Review in Medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative efficacy and safety of ursodeoxycholic acid, fibrates, and combination therapy in primary biliary cholangitis: an umbrella meta-analysis of meta-analyses.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Pooled it
- Pharmacological interventions for primary biliary cholangitis: an attempted network meta-analysis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Systematic review with network meta-analysis: statins and risk of hepatocellular carcinoma.Oncotarget · 2016Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Optimal drug regimens for primary biliary cirrhosis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Oncotarget · 2015Pooled it
- Optimal adjuvant therapy for resected hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review with network meta-analysis.Oncotarget · 2015Pooled it
- Ursodeoxycholic acid mitigates cerebral ischemia/reperfusion injury by inhibiting thrombin-induced lipid peroxidation through activation of ALDH3A1.Redox biology · 2026Article
- Advances in Pharmacological Activities, Biosynthesis, and Structural Modification of Ursodeoxycholic Acid (UDCA): A Review.Drug design, development and therapy · 2025Review
- Therapeutic Roles of Bile Acid Signaling in Chronic Liver Diseases.Journal of clinical and translational hepatology · 2018Review
- Cellular network modeling and single cell gene expression analysis reveals novel hepatic stellate cell phenotypes controlling liver regeneration dynamics.BMC systems biology · 2018Article
- Underestimated Male Prevalence of Primary Biliary Cholangitis in China: Results of a 16-yr cohort study involving 769 patients.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- A network meta-analysis of the efficacy and side effects of UDCA-based therapies for primary sclerosing cholangitis.Oncotarget · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Major ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA)-based therapies for primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC) include UDCA only, or combined with either methotrexate (MTX), corticosteroids (COT), colchicine (COC), or bezafibrate (BEF). As the optimum treatment regimen is unclear and warrants exploration, we aimed to compare these therapies in terms of patient mortality or liver transplantation (MOLT) and adverse events (AE).PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Scopus were searched for randomized controlled trials up to August 31, 2014. We estimated the hazard ratios (HRs) for MOLT and odds ratios (ORs) for AE. A sensitivity analysis based on the dose of UDCA was also executed.Thirty-one eligible articles were included. Compared with COT plus UDCA, UDCA (HR 0.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.09-1.39), BEF plus UDCA (HR 0.29, 95% CI 0.02-4.83), COC plus UDCA (HR 0.39, 95% CI 0.07-2.25), MTX plus UDCA (HR 0.28, 95% CI 0.05-1.63), or OBS (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.11-2.01) all provided an increased risk of MOLT. With respect to drug AE profile, although not differing appreciably, BEF plus UDCA was associated with more AEs compared with UDCA (OR 3.16, 95% CI 0.59-20.67), COT plus UDCA (OR 2.27, 95% CI 0.15-33.36), COC plus UDCA (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.09-12.16), MTX plus UDCA (OR 2.03, 95% CI 0.23-17.82), or OBS (OR 3.00, 95% CI 0.53-20.75). The results of sensitivity analyses were highly consistent with previous analyses.COT plus UDCA was the optimal UDCA-based regimen for both MOLT and AEs. BEF plus UDCA was most likely to cause AEs, whereas monotherapy with UDCA and coadministriation of COT plus UDCA appeared to be associated with the fewest AEs for PBC treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.