SynthesisInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2025
Efficacy and safety of IL-23p19 antagonists versus placebo in inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic review and meta‑analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionIL-23p19 antagonists, selectively blocking IL-23 signaling via p19 targeting without affecting IL-12, represent a novel therapeutic class for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). While multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have evaluated their efficacy and safety in IBD, findings remain fragmented and exhibit significant heterogeneity.
aimThis updated meta-analysis was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of IL-23p19 antagonists compared with placebo for induction and maintenance therapy in patients with IBD.
methodSystematic searches of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and OVID were conducted until May 13, 2025 for IBD RCTs evaluating IL-23p19 antagonists. Methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane RoB tool. The data collected included details on study design, participant characteristics, and study outcomes. The risk ratio (RR) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) were calculated using the random-effects model.
resultsThe review includes 14 publications involving 8,463 IBD patients. Significantly higher rates of clinical remission (RR 2.18, 95% CI 1.87-2.54), clinical response (RR 1.74, 95% CI 1.54-1.96), endoscopic remission (RR 2.94, 95% CI 2.33-3.70), and endoscopic response (RR 2.71, 95% CI 2.28-3.23) were observed in IBD patients receiving IL-23p19 inhibitors compared to placebo. Safety analyses revealed comparable overall adverse events with active therapy (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.92-1.01); however, significant reductions occurred in serious adverse events (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.41-0.64), treatment discontinuations due to adverse events (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.28-0.47), and serious infections (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.41-0.96) versus placebo.
conclusionThis meta-analysis confirms robust therapeutic benefits and acceptable safety of IL-23p19 inhibitors in IBD patients. Subgroup analyses showed IL-23p19 inhibitors maintained comparable efficacy regardless of prior biologic use, disease duration, or baseline C-reactive protein levels, indicating consistent efficacy across these clinical subgroups. Future longitudinal investigations should evaluate durability of treatment response and extended safety outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41231362What 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.