Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2026
Efficacy of Biological and Steroid Therapies in Adolescent and Adult Patients With Eosinophilic Esophagitis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis With Meta-Regression.
СтатьяNetwork Meta-AnalysisСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Al Hayek Mohammad, Lucendo Alfredo J, Savarino Edoardo Vincenzo, Barberio Brigida, Gyawali C Prakash, Chan Walter W, Visaggi Pierfrancesco, Najah Qasi, Yadlapati Rena, McCoul Edward D, Elhadi Muhammed, Laine Loren
Аннотация
BACKGROUND & AIMS: The therapeutic hierarchy of current pharmacologic options for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) has not been established. We performed a network meta-analysis to evaluate the comparative efficacy of pharmacological therapies for EoE.
METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception to May 25, 2025, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) ≥12 weeks in duration comparing corticosteroids, biologics, or proton pump inhibitors with placebo or active comparators in participants aged ≥12 years. Key outcomes included changes in dysphagia from baseline and histologic remission (≤6 eosinophils/high-power field) at 12, 24, and 48 weeks. Treatments were ranked using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). Certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework.
RESULTS: Thirteen RCTs were included. For dysphagia improvement compared with placebo and active comparators, dupilumab 300 mg and cendakimab 360 mg demonstrated moderate-to-high-certainty benefit at 12 and 24 weeks, whereas budesonide oral suspension (BOS) 2 mg demonstrated moderate-to-high-certainty benefit at 12 weeks; no 24-week data were available for BOS. At 48 weeks, budesonide orodispersible tablets (BOT) 0.5 and 1 mg demonstrated high certainty benefits for dysphagia improvement compared with placebo and active comparators. SUCRA ranked dupilumab highest for dysphagia improvement at 12 and 24 weeks (92% and 97%), and BOT 1 mg highest at 48 weeks (96%). For histologic remission, all agents except etrasimod showed moderate certainty benefits vs placebo across time points. SUCRA ranked BOS 2 mg highest at 12 weeks (78%), benralizumab 30 mg at 24 weeks (80%), and BOT 1 mg at 48 weeks (79%).
CONCLUSIONS: All evaluated therapies except etrasimod achieved histologic remission, whereas only dupilumab, cendakimab, BOS, and BOT were associated with symptomatic improvement in EoE, highlighting dissociations between histologic and symptomatic responses. Most corticosteroid trials were short-term and lacked direct comparisons with biologics. Robust head-to-head trials are needed to define optimal treatment strategies, assess long-term outcomes, and clarify the role of symptom, endoscopic, and histologic endpoints in therapeutic decision-making.
METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception to May 25, 2025, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) ≥12 weeks in duration comparing corticosteroids, biologics, or proton pump inhibitors with placebo or active comparators in participants aged ≥12 years. Key outcomes included changes in dysphagia from baseline and histologic remission (≤6 eosinophils/high-power field) at 12, 24, and 48 weeks. Treatments were ranked using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). Certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework.
RESULTS: Thirteen RCTs were included. For dysphagia improvement compared with placebo and active comparators, dupilumab 300 mg and cendakimab 360 mg demonstrated moderate-to-high-certainty benefit at 12 and 24 weeks, whereas budesonide oral suspension (BOS) 2 mg demonstrated moderate-to-high-certainty benefit at 12 weeks; no 24-week data were available for BOS. At 48 weeks, budesonide orodispersible tablets (BOT) 0.5 and 1 mg demonstrated high certainty benefits for dysphagia improvement compared with placebo and active comparators. SUCRA ranked dupilumab highest for dysphagia improvement at 12 and 24 weeks (92% and 97%), and BOT 1 mg highest at 48 weeks (96%). For histologic remission, all agents except etrasimod showed moderate certainty benefits vs placebo across time points. SUCRA ranked BOS 2 mg highest at 12 weeks (78%), benralizumab 30 mg at 24 weeks (80%), and BOT 1 mg at 48 weeks (79%).
CONCLUSIONS: All evaluated therapies except etrasimod achieved histologic remission, whereas only dupilumab, cendakimab, BOS, and BOT were associated with symptomatic improvement in EoE, highlighting dissociations between histologic and symptomatic responses. Most corticosteroid trials were short-term and lacked direct comparisons with biologics. Robust head-to-head trials are needed to define optimal treatment strategies, assess long-term outcomes, and clarify the role of symptom, endoscopic, and histologic endpoints in therapeutic decision-making.