Dataset Information

Efficacy, Safety and Future Perspectives of JAK Inhibitors in the IBD Treatment.

ABSTRACT: Although development of biologics has importantly improved the effectiveness in inducing and maintaining remission in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), biologic therapies still have several limitations. Effective, low-cost drug therapy with good safety profile and compliance is therefore a substantial unmet medical need. A promising target for IBD treatment strategies are Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors, which are small molecules that interact with cytokines implicated in pathogenesis of IBD. In contrast to monoclonal antibodies, which are able to block a single cytokine, JAK inhibitors have the potential to affect multiple cytokine-dependent immune pathways, which may improve the therapeutic response in some IBD patients. Tofacitinib, inhibiting signaling via different types of JAKs, has been already approved for ulcerative colitis, and several other small-molecule are still under investigation. However, one of the main concerns about using JAK inhibitors is the risk of thromboembolic events. Moreover, patients with COVID-19 appear to have an increased susceptibility for immunothrombosis. Therefore, thrombotic complications may become a serious limitation in the use of JAK inhibitors in the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. As many questions about safety and efficacy of small molecules still remain unclear, in our review we present the current data regarding approved JAK inhibitors, as well as those in clinical development for the treatment of IBD.

SUBMITTER: Dudek P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8658230 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background Alopecia areata (AA) is an immune disease characterized by non-scarring hair loss. With the widespread application of JAK inhibitors in immune-related diseases, attention is being given to their role in the treatment of AA. However, it is unclear which JAK inhibitors have a satisfactory or positive effect on AA. This network meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of different JAK inhibitors in the treatment of AA. Methods The network meta-analysis was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. We included randomized controlled trials as well as a small number of cohort studies. The differences in efficacy and safety between the treatment and control groups were compared. Results Five randomized controlled trials, two retrospective studies, and two prospective studies involving 1689 patients were included in this network meta-analysis. In terms of efficacy, oral baricitinib and ruxolitinib significantly improved the response rate of patients compared to placebo [MD = 8.44, 95% CI (3.63, 19.63)] and [MD = 6.94, 95% CI, (1.72, 28.05)],respectively. Oral baricitinib treatment significantly improved the response rate compared to non-oral JAK inhibitor treatment [MD=7.56, 95% CI (1.32,43.36)]. Oral baricitinib, tofacitinib, and ruxolitinib treatments significantly improved the complete response rate compared to placebo [MD = 12.21, 95% CI (3.41, 43.79)], [MD = 10.16, 95% CI (1.02, 101.54)], and [MD = 9.79, 95% CI, (1.29, 74.27)], respectively. In terms of safety, oral baricitinib, tofacitinib, and ruxolitinib treatments significantly reduced treatment-emergent adverse event rates compared with conventional steroid treatment [MD = 0.08, 95% CI (0.02, 0.42)], [MD = 0.14, 95% CI (0.04, 0.55)], and [MD = 0.35, 95% CI, (0.14, 0.88)], respectively. Conclusion Oral baricitinib and ruxolitinib are excellent options for the treatment of AA owing to their good efficacy and safety profiles. In contrast, non-oral JAK inhibitors do not appear to have satisfactory efficacy in treating AA. However, further studies are required to verify the optimal dose of JAK inhibitors for AA therapy.

Dataset Information

Efficacy, Safety and Future Perspectives of JAK Inhibitors in the IBD Treatment.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets