ReviewPharmacy (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Ustekinumab in the Treatment of Crohn's Disease-A Narrative Review on Clinical Efficacy and Safety Profile.
Review in Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy and safety of IL-23p19 and IL-12/23p40 inhibitors in moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Annals of medicine · 2025Pooled it
- A Comparative Study of Different Biological Drugs in First-Line Therapy in Crohn's Disease: A Multicenter Descriptive Analysis.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- ILC plasticity in intestinal immune barrier remodeling: current evidence and therapeutic implications for inflammatory bowel disease.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Long-term efficacy of therapeutic drug monitoring-guided optimization of ustekinumab maintenance therapy for Crohn's disease patients.Scientific reports · 2025Observational
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
Crohn's disease (CD) is a chronic inflammatory disorder of the gastrointestinal tract that leads to significant deterioration in patients' quality of life. Biologic therapy, including the use of ustekinumab (UST), is a modern approach to treating the moderate to severe form of CD, especially in patients refractory to traditional treatments. UST, which acts as an interleukin IL-12 and IL-23 antagonist, has shown high efficacy in reducing inflammation, improving quality of life, and promoting mucosal regeneration and fistula healing. However, the use of biologic therapies, such as UST, has challenges related to the timing of treatment and patient response, including the problem of immunogenicity. To determine the clinical efficacy and safety profile of UST in the treatment of CD, a review of the literature published in the PubMed database over the last 5 years was conducted. After excluding articles that did not meet the inclusion criteria, we analyzed 42 clinical studies. The review discusses the available data on the efficacy and safety of UST, as well as its comparison with other biologic therapies, such as infliximab and adalimumab. UST, although not significantly greater to adalimumab, has lower immunogenicity and higher treatment retention. The therapeutic value of UST is also confirmed by biosimilars such as ABP 65 and FYB202, which show comparable efficacy and safety profile. The analysis of predictive biomarkers, such as serum drug levels and baseline eosinophil levels, could be an important element in the future personalization of CD treatment. The review's findings point to the importance of further research to improve the tailoring of therapies to individual patients and improve long-term treatment outcomes.
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.