ReviewJGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology2025
Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor (PPAR) Agonists for Patients With Primary Biliary Cholangitis With Inadequate Response to Ursodeoxycholic Acid (UDCA): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Review in JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Profile of Patients with Primary Biliary Cholangitis and Evaluation of Response to Ursodeoxycholic Acid in a Romanian Center-Retrospective Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Primary biliary cholangitis. Treatment options in 2025. A narrative review.Frontiers in immunology · 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
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR) agonists are agents used for patients with primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) who do not respond to conventional agents like ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA). This meta-analysis aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of PPAR agonists, including fibrates and selective PPAR agonists, on biochemical response and safety outcomes in patients with primary biliary cholangitis who were non-responders to UDCA. Methods: We searched various electronic databases, including MEDLINE (via PubMed), Embase, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov, to retrieve randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PPAR agonists to placebo in patients with PBC. Results: Our meta-analysis, including 12 RCTs involving 973 patients, showed that PPAR agonists, including fibrates and selective PPAR agonists, significantly reduce mean alkaline phosphatase (ALP) levels from baseline to follow-up as compared to placebo. They also increase the number of patients with the composite biochemical response (RR 5.51; 95% CI: 2.80, 10.86) and normalize ALP levels with a reduction in pruritus NRS Score and the incidence of pruritus. There was no significant change between the two groups when assessing the mean change in total bilirubin, adverse events, serious adverse events, or mean change in PBC-40 score. Conclusion: In conclusion, our research underscores the potential of novel PPAR agonists in improving biochemical markers in PBC, particularly in patients unresponsive to UDCA. However, further studies with larger sample sizes, longer follow-up durations, and a focus on patient-centered outcomes are necessary. Additionally, exploring combination therapies and mechanistic insights will help us fully realize the therapeutic potential of PPAR agonists in PBC.
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.