SynthesisPloS one2024
Efficacy and safety of upadacitinib in the treatment of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: A systematic review.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib in the treatment of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD), and provide reference for rational clinical medication.
methodsPubMed, Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Clinical Trials Website, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from the time of establishment until January 6, 2024, to compile a list of all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including upadacitinib in the treatment of moderate-to-severe AD. The quality of the included studies was evaluated using the Cochrane Systematic Review. Review Manager 5.3 software was utilized for statistical analysis of outcome measures.
resultsA total of five studies were included in the meta-analysis. The results revealed that the 15 mg and 30 mg upadacitinib significantly improved Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) 75% {[Odds Ratio (OR) = 8.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) (5.84-12.60), P < 0.00001] [OR = 15.62, 95% CI (10.89-22.42), P < 0.00001]}, Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) ≥ 4 {[OR = 7.13, 95% CI (5.63-9.01), P < 0.00001] [OR = 11.30, 95% CI (8.93-14.31), P < 0.00001]}, and Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) 0/1 {[OR = 8.63, 95% CI (6.60-11.27), P < 0.00001] [OR = 16.04, 95% CI (12.26-20.99), P < 0.00001]} compared to placebo. In terms of safety, although 15 mg and 30 mg upadacitinib significantly increased the overall adverse events rate compared to placebo {[OR = 1.31, 95% CI (1.09-1.58), P = 0.004] [OR = 1.85, 95% CI (1.54-2.21), P < 0.00001]}, there was no significant difference in the serious adverse events rate {[OR = 0.73, 95% CI (0.41-1.29), P = 0.28] [OR = 0.69, 95% CI (0.39-1.23), P = 0.21]} and withdrawal rate due to adverse events {[OR = 0.66, 95% CI (0.39-1.11), P = 0.12] [OR = 0.85, 95% CI (0.52-1.38), P = 0.50]} compared to placebo.
conclusionThis meta-analysis preliminarily suggests that upadacitinib is effective and safe for usage in the treatment of moderate-to-severe AD. Additionally, upadacitinib can instantly relieve itchiness and effectively reduce symptoms and signs, with its 30-mg dose being more effective than the 15-mg dose.
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.