ReviewFrontiers in pharmacology2026
Biologic and small-molecule therapies for inflammatory bowel disease: mechanisms, comparative evidence and the emerging pipeline.
Review in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), comprising ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD), is a chronic immune-mediated disorder of rising global prevalence, with newly industrialised nations now entering the phase of most rapid growth. Its therapeutic landscape has transformed since 2020. Three selective interleukin (IL)-23p19 antagonists have been approved for both UC and CD; two sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor modulators and a second-generation Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor have entered routine practice; subcutaneous formulations have altered delivery; and the first formal head-to-head trials, together with placebo-controlled trials incorporating an active reference arm, have begun to replace indirect comparison with direct evidence. In parallel, the ORAL Surveillance trial prompted a class-wide boxed warning that recalibrated, but did not eliminate, the role of JAK inhibitors. Three further strategies have generated late-phase data: anti-TL1A antibodies, which target a pathway not previously addressed pharmacologically in IBD; the miR-124 enhancer obefazimod; and the oral IL-23 receptor antagonist peptide icotrokinra. Several of these results are available only from conference presentations or company announcements and await peer review. Despite this expansion, induction remission rates remain clustered between roughly 15% and 50%, and endoscopic remission rates lower still. This review synthesises the mechanistic basis, pivotal evidence, comparative effectiveness, safety and regulatory status of approved and investigational therapies for IBD, and how treat-to-target principles, early advanced therapy and emerging biomarkers are reshaping positioning. It also covers two areas comparable reviews omit: acute severe ulcerative colitis, where advanced therapy is least well evidenced, and positioning in newly industrialised nations, where tuberculosis and hepatitis B endemicity and reimbursement, not efficacy alone, often determine the choice of mechanism.
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.