Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors have become promising treatments for atopic dermatitis (AD), however no study directly comparing JAK inhibitors with each other has been reported. We conducted this network meta-analysis to determine the comparative efficacy and safety of three common oral JAK inhibitors including abrocitinib, baricitinib, and upadacitinib for moderate-to-severe AD. We first identified eligible studies from published meta-analyzes, then we searched PubMed to obtain additional studies published between February and July 2021. Clinical efficacy and safety were evaluated as primary and secondary outcome, respectively.After extracting data and assessing methodological quality, we utilized ADDIS 1.4 software to conduct pair-wise and network meta-analyzes. Ten eligible studies were included in the final analysis. Pooled results that abrocitinib, baricitinib, and upadacitinib obtained higher investigator global assessment (IGA), eczema area, and severity index (EASI) response, however abrocitinib and upadacitinib caused more treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) regardless of doses, compared with placebo. Network meta-analyzes revealed that upadacitinib 30 mg was superior to all regimens and upadacitinib 15 mg was better than remaining regimens except for abrocitinib 200 mg in terms of IGA and EASI response. Moreover, abrocitinib 200 mg was superior to abrocitinib 100 mg, baricitinib 1 mg, 2 mg, and 4 mg for clinical efficacy. However, upadacitinib 30 mg caused more TEAEs.

No abstract

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text

Background Intertrochanteric fracture (ITF) is increasing with the rapid increase in the aging population, often causes a high mortality rate in old patients and increases the economic burden of the family and society. ERAS (Enhanced Recovery after Surgery) is a powerful guarantee for patients to accelerate their recovery after surgery. TCM (traditional Chinese medicine) promotes repair of injured tissues and eliminates traumatic aseptic inflammation. Therefore, this prospective randomized controlled clinical trial aims to evaluate the clinical effect of the evidence-based ERAS pathway of integrating TCM with western medicine on perioperative outcomes in ITF patients undergoing intramedullary fixation and provide reliable evidence-based data for applying the program to clinical practice. Methods/design We will conduct a prospective randomized, blinded, controlled trial to compare the effectiveness of ERAS care pathway with traditional care pathway and to investigate whether the ERAS care pathway can improve the perioperative outcome in ITF patients undergoing intramedullary fixation. A total of 60 patients with ITF will be enrolled and treated with the two care pathway, respectively. Length of stay, economic indicators, Harris score, VAS score, time to get out of bed, 30-day readmission rates, postoperative transfusion rates, discharge to home, and mortality will be evaluated. Any signs of acute adverse reactions will be recorded at each visit during treatment. Discussion Although an evidence-based process using the best available literature and Delphi expert-opinion method has been used to establish an ERAS pathway of integrating TCM with western medicine, there is a lack of consensus about its effectiveness. This trial will provide convincing evidence about the effect of ERAS pathway. Trial registration Registered on 12 October 2019. Trial number is ChiCTR1900026487.