ArticleAlimentary pharmacology & therapeutics2025
Network Meta-Analysis: Efficacy of Biological Therapies and Small Molecules as Maintenance Therapy in Ulcerative Colitis.
Article in Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Safety and efficacy of IL-23 inhibitors in patients with moderate to severe ulcerative colitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.International journal of colorectal disease · 2025Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of IL-23p19 antagonists versus placebo in inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic review and meta‑analysis of randomized controlled trials.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2025Pooled it
- Temporal transcriptomic profiling identifies core regulators in cytokine-induced gut barrier disruption in differentiated Caco-2 cells.Inflammation research : official journal of the European Histamine Research Society ... [et al.] · 2026Article
- Optimizing Janus kinase inhibitor therapy for ulcerative colitis: a real-world perspective.Intestinal research · 2026Review
- Optimizing Drug Positioning in IBD: Clinical Predictors, Biomarkers, and Practical Approaches to Personalized Therapy.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- Targeting IL-23p19 in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: The Road Ahead.Journal of inflammation research · 2026Review
- Integrative Transcriptomic and Genetic Analysis Prioritizes IRF1 as a Candidate Regulatory Gene Associated with Ulcerative Colitis.Journal of inflammation research · 2026Article
- Bridging the Treatment Access Gap: Janus Kinase Inhibitors as First-line Advanced Therapy for Inflammatory Bowel Disease in Resource-variable Settings.Euroasian journal of hepato-gastroenterologyArticle
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
backgroundNumerous biologics and small molecules are licensed as maintenance therapy for ulcerative colitis (UC). Differences in the design of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have not been considered when comparing efficacy between them.
aimsTo examine the relative efficacy of biologics and small molecules by network meta-analysis according to trial design.
methodsWe searched the literature to 27 February 2025 for RCTs. We judged efficacy using clinical remission, endoscopic improvement, endoscopic remission, or corticosteroid-free remission and according to previous exposure or non-exposure to advanced therapies. Random effects model with data reported as pooled relative risks (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI); drugs ranked by p-score.
resultsWe identified 28 RCTs, 16 re-randomising 6568 patients and 12 treating through 3771 patients. In re-randomised studies, upadacitinib 30 mg o.d. ranked first for clinical remission (RR of failure to achieve clinical remission = 0.52; 95% CI 0.44-0.61, p-score 0.99) and endoscopic improvement (RR = 0.43; 95% CI 0.35-0.52, p-score 0.99). Vedolizumab 300 mg 4-weekly ranked first for endoscopic remission (RR = 0.73; 95% CI 0.64-0.84, p-score 0.92) and guselkumab 200 mg 4-weekly first for corticosteroid-free remission (RR = 0.40; 95% CI 0.28-0.55, p-score 0.95). In treat-through studies, etrasimod 2 mg o.d. ranked first for clinical remission (RR = 0.73; 95% CI 0.64-0.83, p-score 0.88) and infliximab 10 mg/kg 8-weekly first for endoscopic improvement (RR = 0.64; 95% CI 0.56-0.74, p-score 0.94).
conclusionIn network meta-analysis, upadacitinib and etrasimod were consistently efficacious as maintenance therapy in UC.
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.