SynthesisInflammopharmacology2025
Efficacy and safety of cyclosporine in colitis: An updated meta-analysis of randomized control trials (1998 to 2024).
Synthesis in Inflammopharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundUlcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic inflammatory condition affecting the large intestine that can progress to colorectal cancer if left untreated. Different therapeutic approaches are used for its treatment and cyclosporine is one of them. It has been investigated as a rescue treatment option in cases when patients are unresponsive to steroidal therapy. However, its efficacy and safety remain uncertain. This study aims to conduct a comprehensive analysis of clinical evidence on cyclosporine safety and efficacy for the treatment of UC.
methodsElectronic databases, Cochrane Library, and PubMed were searched from 1998 till December 2024 to screen the relevant studies. A systematic approach was followed to pool and analyze the studies following the PICOS framework (population, intervention, comparison, outcome, and study design). Data was extracted systematically and analyzed using Comprehensive Meta-analysis software (CMA version 3), with the risk of bias evaluated using the RoB-2 tool, heterogeneity measured using I
resultsOut of 27 studies initially identified, 6 studies meeting the eligibility criteria were included in the final analysis. The risk of bias was high in four studies for all the outcomes except for colectomy rates. Heterogeneity between studies was not significant for all outcomes. Analysis results demonstrated that there was no statistically significant difference between the clinical response (OR = 1.290, 95%CI 0.552-3.012, P = 0.557), colectomy rates (OR = 1.171, 95%CI 0.776-1.767, P = 0.452), and serious adverse events (OR = 0.592, 95%CI 0.313-1.120, P = 0.107) of cyclosporine in comparison with control group.
conclusionThere is no statistically significant difference between cyclosporine compared to the control group in improving clinical outcomes for patients with ulcerative colitis. Future studies with larger sample sizes can explore its role with combination therapy in targeted patient sub-groups.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41065960What 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.