Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39014279›Full record

ReviewDermatology and therapy2024

Biologics Versus JAK Inhibitors. Part II: Risk of Infections. A Narrative Review.

Miguel Mansilla-Polo, Daniel Morgado-Carrasco

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Dermatology and therapy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Dermatologic Toxicities Induced by JAK Inhibitors.American journal of clinical dermatology · 2026
    Review
  6. [Biologics and infections: understand and recognize].Dermatologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Infection risk in atopic dermatitis patients treated with biologics and JAK inhibitors: BioDay results.Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV · 2025
    Article
  15. From Pathways to Patients in Atopic Dermatitis: Advanced Systemic Therapies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Miguel Mansilla-PoloDepartment of Dermatology, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe, Valencia, Spain.
Daniel Morgado-CarrascoDepartment of Dermatology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Universitat de Barcelona, Villarroel 170, 08036, Barcelona, Spain. morgado@clinic.cat.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4704-6132

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe risk of infections associated with biological drugs (BD) and Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) has been extensively explored in the literature. However, there is a dearth of studies that evaluate both pharmacological groups together and, furthermore, compare them. Here, we review the risk of infections associated with BD and JAKi used in dermatology.

methodsA narrative review was performed. All relevant articles evaluating the risk of infection and opportunistic infections with BD and JAKi between January 2010 and February 2024 were selected.

resultsOverall, the incidence of infections, serious infections, and opportunistic infections associated with BD and JAKi is low, but higher than in the general population. JAKi approved for dermatological disorders (abrocitinib, baricitinib, deucravacitinib, upadacitinib, ritlecitinib, and topical ruxolitinib) have been shown to be safe, and present a low rate of infections. We found an elevated risk, especially with anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) agents, rituximab, and JAKi (particularly tofacitinib at high doses). Specific associations with infections include tuberculosis and tuberculosis reactivation with anti-TNF agents and tocilizumab; candidiasis with anti-interleukin (IL) 17 agents; hepatitis B virus reactivation with rituximab, anti-TNF, and JAKi; and herpes simplex and herpes zoster infections with JAKi (especially tofacitinib and upadacitinib at high doses). The incidence of infections with ustekinumab and anti-IL-23 was very low. Anti-IL-1, nemolizumab, tralokinumab, and omalizumab were not associated with an increased risk of infections. Dupilumab could decrease the incidence of cutaneous infections.

conclusionsAnti-TNF agents, rituximab, and JAKi (particularly tofacitinib) can increase the risk of infections. Close monitoring of patients undergoing these therapies is recommended. Prospective studies with long-term follow-up are needed to comparatively evaluate the risks of infection deriving from treatment with BD and JAKi.

Indexed as

Anti-IL-17Anti-IL-23Anti-TNFDermatologyImmunosuppressionInfectionsJAK inhibitorsOpportunistic infections

Identifiers

PMID39014279
PMCPMC11333430

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.