ArticleBMJ open gastroenterology2019
Tofacitinib for the treatment of moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis: a systematic review, network meta-analysis and economic evaluation.
Article in BMJ open gastroenterology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 13 papers, 4 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and safety of advanced therapies for moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis in induction and maintenance: systematic literature review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2025Pooled it
- Efficacy and Safety of Advanced Therapies in Moderately-to-Severely Active Ulcerative Colitis: a Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.Advances in therapy · 2024Pooled it
- Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Tofacitinib Compared with Biologics in Biologic-Naïve Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Ulcerative Colitis in Japan.PharmacoEconomics · 2023Pooled it
- Comparative efficacy of advanced treatments in biologic-naïve or biologic-experienced patients with ulcerative colitis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2023Pooled it
- The JAK attack: transforming the management of ulcerative colitis in India.Intestinal research · 2026Review
- Cost-effectiveness of different strategies with biologics for the treatment of moderate to severe Crohn's disease in China.World journal of gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Real-Life Efficacy of Tofacitinib in Various Situations in Ulcerative Colitis: A Retrospective Worldwide Multicenter Collaborative Study.Inflammatory bowel diseases · 2024Article
- Ulcerative colitis: STRIDE-ing beyond symptoms with new standards.Singapore medical journal · 2024Article
- Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Subcutaneous Infliximab for Inflammatory Bowel Diseases in Sequential Biologic Treatment.Inflammatory bowel diseases · 2023Article
- Article
- Cost Effectiveness of Tofacitinib for the Treatment of Moderate to Severe Active Ulcerative Colitis in Colombia.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2022Article
- Primary Failure to an Anti-TNF Agent in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Switch (to a Second Anti-TNF Agent) or Swap (for Another Mechanism of Action)?Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Review
- Efficacy of JAK inhibitors in Crohn's Disease.Journal of Crohn's & colitis · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsIn the UK, treatments for patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis who have an inadequate response to conventional therapies comprise four biological therapies-the tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) agents adalimumab, golimumab and infliximab and the anti-integrin vedolizumab-and an orally administered small molecule therapy, tofacitinib. However, there have been few head-to-head studies of these therapies. This study aimed to compare the clinical and cost-effectiveness of tofacitinib with biological therapies.
methodsA systematic literature review was conducted to identify all relevant randomised controlled trial (RCT) evidence. Clinical response, clinical remission and serious infection rates were synthesised using network meta-analysis (NMA). The results were used to compare the cost-effectiveness of tofacitinib and biologics with conventional therapy, using a Markov model, which incorporated lifetime costs and consequences of treatment from a UK National Health Service perspective. Analyses were conducted separately for TNFi-naïve and TNFi-exposed populations.
resultsSeventeen RCTs were used in the NMAs. There were no statistically significant differences among biological therapies and tofacitinib for either TNFi-naïve or TNFi-exposed patients. In TNFi-naïve patients, all therapies were more efficacious than placebo. In TNFi-exposed patients, only tofacitinib was significantly more efficacious than placebo as induction therapy, and only tofacitinib and vedolizumab were significantly more efficacious than placebo as maintenance therapies. There were no significant differences in serious infection rates among therapies. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for tofacitinib versus conventional therapy were £21 338 and £22 816 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) in the TNFi-naïve and TNFi-exposed populations, respectively. TNFi therapies were dominated or extendedly dominated in both populations. Compared with vedolizumab, tofacitinib was associated with a similar number of QALYs, at a lower cost.
conclusionTofacitinib is an efficacious treatment for moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis and is likely to be a cost-effective use of NHS resources.
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.