Abstract
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
| Graphical Abstract |
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.
No comments:
Post a Comment