ReviewCureus2024
Efficacy and Safety of Upadacitinib in Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis: A Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Successful Treatment of Nail Lichen Planus by the Janus Kinase 1 Upadacitinib and Literature Review.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic, relapsing inflammatory skin disorder. Topical corticosteroids are the cornerstone of therapy in mild AD, whereas the JAK inhibitor upadacitinib is approved in the United States, Europe, and other countries for treating moderate-severe AD in adults and children over 12 years old whose disease is not adequately controlled with other systemic drugs, including biologics. The objective of this meta-analysis was to assess the overall efficacy and safety of upadacitinib in moderate to severe AD. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib in moderate to severe AD were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled analysis revealed a significant proportion of patients achieving Eczema Area and Severity Index-75 (EASI 75) (R.R. = 3.86; 95% CI = 3.12 to 4.78, p < 0.00001), EASI 100 (R.R. = 13.09; 95% CI = 7.40 to 23.17, p < 0.00001), Worst Pruritus Numerical Rating Score (WP-NRS) response (R.R. = 4.44; 95% CI = 3.72 to 5.29, p< 0.00001), and validated Investigator's Global Assessment (v-IGA) (RR = 5.96; 95% CI = 4.79 to 7.41, p < 0. 00001) in the upadacitinib arm compared to the placebo arm. Moreover, the pooled analysis also suggested that treatment-emergent adverse events (TAEs) were relatively higher with upadacitinib than with placebo, but were mild and easily manageable (R.R. = 1.15; 95% CI = 1.09 to 1.23, p<0.00001). This meta-analysis showed that upadacitinib had a significant beneficial effect and tolerable adverse effect profile in patients with moderate and severe AD. Dose regimens of 15 mg and 30 mg seemed to have similar benefits. However, further trials are needed to assess long-term efficacy and safety profile.
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.