UNASSIGNED: Conventional rosacea treatments are not uniformly pervasive, and the adverse reactions can potentially constrain their utility. The clinical use of JAK1 inhibitors upadacitinib and abrocitinib in the treatment of refractory rosacea has rarely been explored.
UNASSIGNED: We presented two cases of patients who received the JAK1 inhibitor upadacitinib and four cases of patients who received the JAK1 inhibitor abrocitinib for the treatment of refractory rosacea.
UNASSIGNED: The JAK1 inhibitors upadacitinib and abrocitinib may be promising medical options for patients with refractory rosacea. However, the long-term safety and efficacy of upadacitinib and abrocitinib require prospective controlled studies to assess them more comprehensively.

To explore the effectiveness and safety of upadacitinib for managing axial spondyloarthritis. Four databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and Web of Science) were applied to search randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for assessing upadacitinib treatment for axial spondyloarthritis published until January 2024. Five RCTs involving 1,246 participants were included. The upadacitinib group had significantly higher percentages of participants achieving Assessment of spondyloarthritis international society (ASAS) 20, ASAS40, ASAS partial remission, Bath ankylosing spondylitis disease activity index (BASDAI) 50, Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) low disease activity, ASDAS inactive disease, ASDAS clinically important improvement, and ASDAS major improvement, except for Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) absenteeism. Obvious improvements were observed in the upadacitinib group for ASDAS (CRP), BASDAI, Modified BASDAI, Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI), Canadian Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium (SPARCC) MRI spine, SPARCC MRI sacroiliac joint, Ankylosing Spondylitis Quality of Life (ASQoLS), ASAS Health Index, Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Metrology Index (BASMI), Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score (MASES), Total Back Pain, Nocturnal Back Pain, WPAI overall work impairment, WPAI presenteeism, and WPAI activity impairment. Adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs) incidence rates showed no significant difference differ between upadacitinib and placebo groups. Subgroup analysis revealed that disease subtype and age did not significantly affect efficacy, and upadacitinib demonstrated comparable efficacy to adalimumab for axial spondyloarthritis. Upadacitinib exhibited satisfactory efficacy in treating axial spondyloarthritis, reducing disease activity and significantly enhancing patients\' physical function, emotional well-being, and social engagement. This meta-analysis offers robust evidence supporting upadacitinib as a new treatment for axial spondyloarthritis patients.

暂无摘要。

BACKGROUND: Many patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) do not respond well to, or tolerate conventional and biological therapies. There is currently no consensus on the treatment of refractory UC. Studies have demonstrated that the selective Janus kinase 1 inhibitor upadacitinib, a small-molecule drug, is effective and safe for treating UC. However, no studies have revealed that upadacitinib is effective in treating refractory UC with primary nonresponse to infliximab and vedolizumab.
METHODS: We report the case of a 44-year-old male patient with a chief complaint of bloody diarrhoea with mucus and pus, in addition to dizziness. The patient had recurrent disease after receiving mesalazine, prednisone, azathioprine, infliximab and vedolizumab over four years. Based on the endoscopic findings and pathological biopsy, the patient was diagnosed with refractory UC. In particular, the patient showed primary nonresponse to infliximab and vedolizumab. Based on the patient\'s history and recurrent disease, we decided to administer upadacitinib. During hospitalisation, the patient was received upadacitinib under our guidance. Eight weeks after the initiation of upadacitinib treatment, the patient\'s symptoms and endoscopic findings improved significantly. No notable adverse reactions have been reported to date.
CONCLUSIONS: Our case report suggests that upadacitinib may represent a valuable strategy for treating refractory UC with primary nonresponse.

Alopecia Areata is a hair disorder influenced by factors such as genetics, immune system, and environmental triggers. The pathogenesis of this condition is still unclear, leading to unsatisfactory current treatments and causing a large number of patients to suffer from it. Janus kinase inhibitors are a new class of drugs that have emerged in recent years and are expected to be promising therapeutic tools for alopecia areata. We report five patients with varying backgrounds and severity of alopecia areata. All of them had received conventional therapy without success. Five patients took Upadacitinib at a dose of 15 mg once daily, and all of them achieved satisfactory efficacy. No adverse events were observed during the treatment of 5 patients.

UNASSIGNED: Recent studies have confirmed the possibility of using upadacitinib for treating atopic dermatitis (AD). However, there is no meta-analysis to summarize and quantify the efficacy and safety of the drug, especially for adolescents with AD.
UNASSIGNED: To evaluate the overall efficacy and safety of upadacitinib in adults and adolescents with AD.
UNASSIGNED: We developed this systematic review and meta-analysis according to PRISMA guidelines. Risk-of-bias assessment tool, RoB2 (revised version 2019) was used for quality assessment.
UNASSIGNED: Four RCTs were enrolled in the analysis, 3 of which on both adults and adolescents, while the other on adults only. For either adults or adolescents, the group treated with upadacitinib all had better performance than controls: EASI-75 (adults): RR = 4.68, 95% CI: 4.09, 5.35; NRS4 (adults): RR = 4.07, 95% CI: 3.15, 5.25; EASI-75 (adolescents): RR = 4.16, 95% CI: 2.70, 6.42; NRS4 (adolescents): RR = 4.52, 95% CI: 2.49, 8.21. Furthermore, upadacitinib 30 mg was more effective than 15 mg. For serious AEs, upper respiratory tract infection and headache, there was no significant difference between the upadacitinib group and controls. However, the treatment of upadacitinib may increase the risk of nasopharyngitis, increase blood creatine phosphokinase and cause acne.
UNASSIGNED: Upadacitinib seems to be a promising drug for AD. More long-term and larger-sized randomized clinical trials are required to further assess the safety and efficacy of upadacitinib for AD.

UNASSIGNED: Upadacitinib, an oral selective-JAK1 inhibitor, has been used in clinical trials to treat atopic dermatitis (AD).
UNASSIGNED: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib in moderate-to-severe AD.
UNASSIGNED: We searched clinical trials from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library databases, and Web of Science. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of upadacitinib treatment on patients with moderate-to-severe AD were included. A meta-analysis was performed using the fixed- or random-effects models to calculate pooled standard mean differences or relative risks (SMD or RR, respectively).
UNASSIGNED: Compared with the placebo group, our meta-analysis revealed that upadacitinib was related to a significant decrease in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) scores, and pruritus numeric rating scale (NRS) scores. A higher response rate in Investigator\'s Global Assessment (IGA) and EASI-75 were also detected in the upadacitinib group. Although patients treated with upadacitinib experienced a higher incidence of adverse events (AEs), these AEs were mild and tolerated. As for serious adverse events (SAEs), there was no difference between the placebo group and the upadacitinib group.
UNASSIGNED: This meta-analysis demonstrated that upadacitinib is a safe and effective treatment for moderate-to-severe AD. Further long-term trials are required for confirmation.

Both bullous pemphigoid (BP) and psoriasis are common immune-related dermatological conditions in clinical practice, but the co-occurrence of these two diseases is rare. Currently, there is no consensus on the long-term safe and effective treatment for patients with both BP and psoriasis. JAK inhibitors are emerging as targeted therapeutic drugs that act by inhibiting Janus kinase activity, regulating the JAK/STAT pathway, blocking the transduction pathway of key proinflammatory cytokines, and influencing T-cell differentiation. These cytokines upstream of the JAK/STAT pathway play a pivotal role in the pathogenesis of numerous inflammatory and autoimmune disorders. Upadacitinib, a second-generation JAK inhibitor with high selectivity, demonstrates promising potential.This case report aims to provide a description of the successful treatment of bullous pemphigoid (BP) and psoriasis vulgaris by using upadacitinib, highlighting significant clinical outcomes. Additionally, we aim to analyze the underlying mechanism of upadacitinib in treating these two comorbidities by reviewing relevant literature from both domestic and international sources. Based on our clinical observations, upadacitinib appears to be a promising and well-tolerated therapeutic option for patients with concurrent BP and psoriasis, offering valuable insights for developing appropriate treatment strategies in clinical practice.

Immune-mediated inflammatory diseases including rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), ankylosing spondylitis (AS), non-radiographic axial spondylarthritis (nr-axSpA), atopic dermatitis (AD), ulcerative colitis (UC), and Crohn\'s disease (CD) pose a substantial burden on patients and their quality of life. Upadacitinib is an orally administered, selective, and reversible Janus kinase inhibitor indicated for seven conditions, but data on its safety versus other active treatments are limited. A systematic literature review of indirect and direct treatment comparisons of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted to assess the safety profile of upadacitinib.
MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for indirect and direct treatment comparisons of RCTs that (1) included licensed upadacitinib dosages; (2) studied any of the seven conditions; (3) reported any adverse events (AEs), serious AEs (SAEs), AEs leading to discontinuation, major adverse cardiovascular event, venous thromboembolism, malignancies, infections or serious infections, and death; and (4) were published between January 2018 and August 2022.
A total of 25 studies were eligible for inclusion. SAEs, AEs leading to discontinuation, and any AEs were commonly studied. RA was the most studied condition, followed by AD and UC. Most studies (16/25, 64%) reported no statistically significant difference in the studied safety outcomes between upadacitinib and other active treatments (e.g., tumor necrosis factor blockers, interleukin receptor antagonists, integrin receptor antagonists, T cell co-stimulation modulator), or placebo (placebo ± methotrexate or topical corticosteroids). Other studies (9/25, 36%) reported mixed results of no statistically significant difference and either statistically higher (8/25, 32%) or lower rates (1/25, 4%) on upadacitinib.
Most studies suggested that upadacitinib has no statistically significant difference in the studied safety outcomes compared to active treatments or placebo in patients with RA, PsA, AS, AD, UC, and CD. A few studies reported higher rates, but findings were inconsistent with limited interpretation.

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 %).
CONCLUSIONS: 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.