Observational studyUnited European gastroenterology journal2024
Real-World Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Filgotinib and Upadacitinib for Ulcerative Colitis: A Multicentre Cohort Study.
Observational study in United European gastroenterology journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Asian Pacific Association of Gastroenterology (APAGE) Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Use of Small Molecules and IL-23 p19 Inhibitors in Ulcerative Colitis and Crohn's Disease.Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026Guideline
- Upadacitinib Reduces Rates of Hospitalization in Ulcerative Colitis: A Large-Scale Nationwide Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Real-world effectiveness and safety of upadacitinib in Korean patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a single-center retrospective study.Intestinal research · 2026Article
- Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Tofacitinib, Filgotinib, and Upadacitinib in Ulcerative Colitis: A Multicenter Real-World Cohort Study.Advances in therapy · 2026Article
- Layer-by-layer engineered outer membrane vesicles enable oral upadacitinib delivery for inflammation control and fibrosis attenuation in ulcerative colitis.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2026Article
- Filgotinib effectiveness and safety as second or third-line therapy in patients with ulcerative colitis: data from a real-world study.Intestinal research · 2026Article
- A multicentered retrospective cohort study comparing JAK inhibitor therapies in moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis.Crohn's & colitis 360 · 2026Article
- Optimizing Janus kinase inhibitor therapy for ulcerative colitis: a real-world perspective.Intestinal research · 2026Review
- Filgotinib inhibits METTL3-mediated mNPJ precision oncology · 2026Article
- Long-term clinical outcomes with filgotinib in ulcerative colitis: 12-month results from the FILGUITO study.World journal of gastroenterology · 2026Observational
- Optimal use and cycling strategies of Janus kinase inhibitors in ulcerative colitis: current evidence and clinical implications from the KASID Guidelines Task Force Team.Intestinal research · 2026Review
- Article
- Article
- Safety Profile of Upadacitinib: Descriptive Analysis in Over 27,000 Patient-Years Across Rheumatoid Arthritis, Psoriatic Arthritis, Axial Spondyloarthritis, Atopic Dermatitis, and Inflammatory Bowel Disease.Advances in therapy · 2025Article
- State-of-the-Art Evidence for Clinical Outcomes and Therapeutic Implications of Janus Kinase Inhibitors in Moderate-to-Severe Ulcerative Colitis: A Narrative Review.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundJanus kinase (JAK) inhibitors, filgotinib (FIL) and upadacitinib (UPA) have emerged as promising treatments for ulcerative colitis (UC). However, a comparative analysis of these JAK inhibitors, particularly in patients previously treated with tofacitinib (TOF), has not been performed.
aimsTo compare the efficacy and safety of FIL and UPA in patients with UC, including those previously exposed to TOF.
methodsA multicentre retrospective cohort study was conducted to compare the effectiveness and safety of FIL and UPA in patients with UC whose treatment was initiated between March 2022 and December 2023. The co-primary outcomes were clinical response and remission at week 8. The secondary outcomes included treatment persistence and adverse events (AEs). Modified Poisson and Cox regression models with multivariable analysis to adjust for confounders and propensity score matching were conducted. Subgroup analyses stratified by previous exposure to TOF and biologics were also conducted.
resultsIn total, 168 patients (98 treated with FIL and 70 treated with UPA) were enrolled in this study, with a median follow-up period of 181 days. The clinical response/remission rates at week 8 were 55.1/46.9% for FIL and 71.4/65.7% for UPA, respectively. UPA was associated with significantly higher rates of clinical response (adjusted risk ratio [RR] 1.40 [95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09 to 1.80]) and clinical remission (adjusted RR 1.54 [95% CI, 1.16 to 2.05]) compared with FIL. This result was consistent across subgroup analyses based on previous exposure to TOF or biologics, except for bio-naive patients. There was no significant difference in the treatment persistence. AEs were more frequent with UPA (45.7%) than with FIL (24.5%) (p = 0.0049). Propensity score matching confirmed the superior overall effectiveness of UPA.
conclusionsUPA demonstrated better short-term effectiveness than FIL, with a higher incidence of AEs.
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.