RESUMO
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Extraintestinal manifestations (EIMs) pose a significant threat in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients. Vedolizumab (VDZ) primarily affects the gastrointestinal tract. However, its impact on EIMs remains uncertain. Therefore, we conducted this meta-analysis to examine the effects of VDZ on EIMs during treatment. METHODS: Relevant studies were identified by conducting thorough searches across electronic databases, including PubMed, Ovid Embase, Medline, and Cochrane CENTRAL. Primary outcomes focused on the proportion of patients with resolution for pre-existing EIMs in IBD patients receiving VDZ. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of patients with EIM exacerbations and new onset EIMs during VDZ treatment. RESULTS: Our meta-analysis encompassed 21 studies. The proportion of patients with resolution of pre-existing EIMs in VDZ-treated IBD patients was 39% (150/386; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.31-0.48). The proportion of patients with EIM exacerbations occurred at a rate of 28% (113/376; 95% CI 0.05-0.50), while new onset EIMs had a rate of 15% (397/2541; 95% CI 0.10-0.20). Subgroup analysis revealed a 40% (136/337) proportion of patients with resolution for articular-related EIMs and a 50% (9/18) rate for erythema nodosum. Exacerbation rates for arthritis/arthralgia, erythema nodosum/pyoderma gangrenosum, and aphthous stomatitis during VDZ use were 28% (102/328), 18% (7/38), and 11% (3/28), respectively. The incidence rate of newly developed EIMs during treatment was 11% (564/4839) for articular-related EIMs, with other EIMs below 2%. CONCLUSION: VDZ demonstrates efficacy in skin-related EIMs like erythema nodosum and joint-related EIMs including arthritis, arthralgia, spondyloarthritis, and peripheral joint diseases. Some joint and skin-related EIMs may experience exacerbation during VDZ therapy.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Upadacitinib, a novel and selective inhibitor of Janus kinase 1, has demonstrated promising efficacy in managing inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). In this systematic review and meta-analysis, our primary aim was to comprehensively assess the therapeutic effectiveness and safety profile of upadacitinib in the treatment of patients with IBD. METHODS: We conducted an extensive literature search across prominent databases, including Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central, to identify pertinent studies providing insights into the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib in IBD. The primary endpoint was the achievement of clinical remission, while secondary endpoints encompassed clinical response, endoscopic response, endoscopic remission, and the evaluation of adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: In this meta-analysis of nine studies, we categorized results by study type. Clinical remission rates were: RCTs 36 % (95 % CI = 30-42 %), real-world studies 25 % (95 % CI = 1-49 %), retrospective studies 40 % (95 % CI = 24-56 %), cohort studies 55 % (95 % CI = 25-85 %). Clinical response rates were: RCTs 61 % (95 % CI = 55-67 %), real-world studies 42 % (95 % CI = 14-70 %), cohort studies 65 % (95 % CI = 57-73 %). Endoscopic remission rates were: RCTs 19 % (95 % CI = 15-24 %), cohort studies 29 % (95 % CI = 5-52 %). Endoscopic response rates were: RCTs 41 % (95 % CI = 36-47 %), cohort studies 57 % (95 % CI = 31-83 %). Incidence rate for any AEs: IBD 69 % (95 % CI = 63-76 %), UC 65 % (95 % CI = 57-74 %), CD 75 % (95 % CI = 67-82 %). CONCLUSION: Cumulative data from real-world studies and trials confirm the efficacy of upadacitinib in IBD induction and maintenance, with consistent safety. However, further long-term studies are needed to understand its sustained effectiveness and safety.