Efficacy and safety of upadacitinib, a selective JAK-1 inhibitor in treatment of ankylosing spondylitis: a meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To systemically assess efficacy and safety of upadacitinib (UPA), a selective inhibitor of Janus kinase 1 (JAK1) in treatment of ankylosing spondylitis (AS). METHODS: Available databases were used to retrieve literatures of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of UPA for AS treatment until February 2024. After that, the data were extracted and the Revman 5.4 software was used to conduct a meta-analysis. RESULTS: A total of 6 articles and 1653 patients (920 in a UPA group (15 mg, q.d) and 733 in a placebo group) were selected in this study. Respectively, UPA treatment significantly increased numbers of the AS patients having 40%, 20%, or partial remission (PR) improvement in assessment of spondylo arthritis international society (ASAS) (ASAS 40: 95%CI: 2.41-4.3, p < 0.00001; ASAS 20: 95%CI: 2.12-3.62, p < 0.00001; ASAS PR: 95%CI: 2.81-7.48, p < 0.00001), Bath ankylosing spondylitis disease activity index (BASDAI50) (95%CI: 2.28 ~ 4.10, p < 0.00001), quality of life (95%CI: 2.06 ~ 3.17, p < 0.00001), AS disease activity score low disease activity (ASDAS LDA) (95%CI: 3.07~9.96, p < 0.00001), ASDAS inactive disease (ID) (95%CI: 2.03 ~ 17.22, p = 0.001), short-form 36 physical component summary (SF-36PCS) (95%CI: 1.53 ~2.81, p < 0.00001), and markedly reduced ASDAS C-reactive protein (CRP) (95%CI: -1.22 ~ -0.42, p < 0.0001), total back pain score (95%CI: -2.01 ~ -0.51, p = 0.001), nighttime back pain score (95%CI: -1.96 ~ -0.54, p = 0.0006), spondylo arthritis research consortium of Canada magnetic resonance imaging (SPARCC MRI) spine score (95%CI: -7.78--3.50, p < 0.00001) and SPARCC MRI sacroiliac joint score (95%CI: -5.99 - -3.09, p < 0.00001), Bath ankylosing spondylitis function index (BASFI) score (95%CI: -1.45 ~ -0.81, p < 0.00001), Maastricht ankylosing spondylitis enthesitis score (MASES) (95%CI: -2.34~-0.35, p = 0.008). Except for neutropenia (95%CI: 1.25 ~ 15.60, p = 0.02), no other adverse effects (AEs) were significantly different between the UPA treatment and placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Through a literature analysis, it reveals that UPA offers significant therapeutic benefits to AS patients with a relatively high safety profile.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.018 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.019 | 0.054 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".