MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2945651855 · doi:10.1111/apt.15297

Systematic review with meta‐analysis: efficacy and safety of oral Janus kinase inhibitors for inflammatory bowel disease

2019· review· en· W2945651855 on OpenAlexafffund
Christopher Ma, Jeffrey K. Lee, Anish R. Mitra, Anouar Teriaky, Daksh Choudhary, Tran M Nguyen, Niels Vande Casteele, Reena Khanna, Remo Panaccione, Brian G. Feagan, Vipul Jairath

Bibliographic record

VenueAlimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaRobarts Clinical TrialsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Cancer InstituteCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCrohn's and Colitis CanadaCanadian Association of Gastroenterology
KeywordsMedicinePlaceboInternal medicineTofacitinibGastroenterologyInflammatory bowel diseaseRelative riskUlcerative colitisAdverse effectJanus kinaseConfidence intervalDiseaseCytokinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Background Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors represent a novel therapeutic class for treatment of inflammatory bowel disease. Aims To determine the efficacy and safety of JAK inhibitors compared to placebo for the treatment of Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC). Methods PubMed, Embase and CENTRAL were systematically searched to November 1, 2018. Randomised placebo‐controlled trials (RCTs) of JAK inhibitors in adult patients with CD or UC were eligible. Open‐label extension studies without a placebo comparator arm were excluded. Clinical, endoscopic, and safety outcomes were extracted and rates relative to placebo were pooled using a random‐effects model. Results A total of 12 RCTs (5 CD, 7 UC) were included. Patients were randomised to placebo (n = 844), tofacitinib (n = 1882), filgotinib (n = 130), peficitinib (n = 176), upadacitinib (n = 387) or TD‐1473 (n = 31). JAK inhibitor treatment was associated with induction of clinical remission in CD (RR, relative risk 1.38 [95% confidence interval CI 1.04‐1.83], P = 0.025, I 2 = 14%) and UC (RR 3.07 [95% CI 2.03‐4.63], P < 0.001, I 2 = 0%). In UC, JAK inhibitor treatment was associated with induction of endoscopic remission (endoscopic Mayo subscore MCSe = 0/1) (RR 2.43 [95% CI 1.64‐3.59], P < 0.001, I 2 = 27%) and mucosal healing (MCSe = 0) (RR 5.50 [95% CI 2.46‐12.32], P < 0.001, I 2 = 0%). JAK inhibitor treatment increased the risk of infection compared to placebo (RR 1.40 [95% CI 1.18‐1.67], P < 0.001, I 2 = 0%), particularly for herpes zoster. Conclusions JAK inhibitors are effective for inducing clinical remission in CD and induction of clinical and endoscopic remission in UC, although are associated with an increased risk of infectious complications.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.470
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.303 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations95
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlimentary Pharmacology & TherapeuticsSame topicInflammatory Bowel DiseaseFrench-language works237,207