SynthesisPharmacology research & perspectives2025
Comparative Efficacy of Different Targeted Therapies in Patients With Moderate-to-Severe Ulcerative Colitis: Systematic Review/Network Meta-Analysis and Mechanistic Overview.
Synthesis in Pharmacology research & perspectives, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- JAK Inhibitors for Crohn's Disease: A Systematic Review and Dose-Response Network Meta-Analysis of Efficacy and Safety.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026Review
- Extraintestinal Manifestations and Cytomegalovirus Reactivation Are Predictors of Difficult-To-Treat in Ulcerative Colitis.Inflammatory intestinal diseasesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ongoing evaluations of targeted therapies for moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis (UC) continue to unfold, with the emergence of novel drugs. However, head-to-head trials comparing these therapies are still lacking. The aim of this study is to investigate the therapeutic effects of targeted therapies in moderate-to-severe UC. The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, PubMed, and Embase were searched from the inception to November 12, 2024. Statistical analyses included multivariate random effects models and Bayesian modeling. Stratified and sensitivity analyses were also performed. Publication bias was assessed using funnel plots. Outcomes such as clinical response/remission, endoscopic remission, mucosal healing, quality of life, adverse events (AEs), and serious adverse events (SAEs) were used to quantify the relative therapeutic effects. Thirty-three studies (33 reported on the induction phase; 13 reported on the maintenance phase) were identified. In the induction phase, Upadacitinib 45 mg demonstrated the highest efficacy in achieving clinical remission (OR 10.03; 95% CI, 4.83-20.80), clinical response (OR 7.96; 95% CI, 3.89-16.28), and mucosal healing rate (OR 8.91; 95% CI, 3.36-23.62). Cobitolimod 250 mg was the first-ranked treatment (SUCRA, 92.67%) in Endoscopic remission. Vedolizumab 108 mg was the best dosage in reducing Adverse Events (AEs). The optimal dosage for reducing Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) was found to be Tulisokibart 1000/500 mg. During the maintenance phase, Etrasimod 2 mg/kg ranked first in clinical remission (OR 9.58; 95% CI, 2.82-32.59), and Upadacitinib 45 mg was superior in endoscopic remission. Additionally, the most effective medication for raising quality of life was Guselkumab 200 mg (OR 3.04; 95% CI, 1.70-5.40). Consequently, there is a need for further high-quality research to conclusively determine the best therapeutic option.
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.