-
Ocular Immunology and Inflammation Oct 2023To review the prevalence, incidence, and risk factors for developing anti-drug antibodies (AAA) in patients with non-infectious uveitis (NIU) treated with Adalimumab...
OBJECTIVE
To review the prevalence, incidence, and risk factors for developing anti-drug antibodies (AAA) in patients with non-infectious uveitis (NIU) treated with Adalimumab (ADA).
METHODS
A systematic literature search was performed on PubMed, EMBASE, Virtual Health Library, Cochrane, and medRxiv. Meta-analysis was performed using random effects.
RESULTS
Nine out of 2,373 studies were included. The prevalence of AAA in NIU patients treated with ADA was 9% (95% CI: 2% to 37%, I = 95% with a P<0.01), it was significantly higher in real-life scenarios (observational studies) than in clinical trials. The pooled incidence at 12 months was 27% (CI 95% 16%-42% I = 0%). Several factors have been associated with AAA generation in NIU patients, including the non-use of concomitant immunosuppressants, presence of autoimmune systemic disease, female gender, etc.
CONCLUSION
This study showed that AAA prevalence is higher in real-life scenarios compared to clinical trials. Further research is needed to elucidate the factors that trigger AAA generation in NIU patients.
PubMed: 37796609
DOI: 10.1080/09273948.2023.2256850 -
Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology Sep 2023Tumor necrosis factor (TNF-α) inhibitors and the α4β7 integrin antagonist, vedolizumab, have been investigated as treatment options for patients with...
BACKGROUND
Tumor necrosis factor (TNF-α) inhibitors and the α4β7 integrin antagonist, vedolizumab, have been investigated as treatment options for patients with steroid-refractory microscopic colitis.
AIMS
To evaluate the benefit of vedolizumab and TNF-α inhibitors in patients with steroid-refractory microscopic colitis.
METHODS
Retrospective studies and case series involving patients with steroid-refractory MC who either received vedolizumab, adalimumab, or infliximab were eligible for inclusion. Pooled proportional meta-analyses were used to calculate the rate of clinical remission at induction, clinical response, maintenance of remission, histologic remission, and overall medication related adverse effects. Statistical analysis was performed in R using the metafor and meta packages.
RESULTS
A total of 14 studies involving 164 patients were included. Pooled analysis showed a clinical remission rate of 63.5% [95% CI (0.483; 0.776), I2=43% P=0.08], 57.8% [95% CI (0.3895; 0.7571), I2=0%, P=0.7541], and 39.3% [95% CI (0.0814; 0.7492), I2=66%, P=0.02] for vedolizumab, infliximab, and adalimumab, respectively. The maintenance of remission rates were 65.9% [95% CI (0.389; 0.889), I2=67%, P=0.02], 45.3% [95% CI (0.1479; 0.7747), I2=0%, P=0.36] and 32.5% [95% CI (0.000; 0.8508), I2=53%, P=0.14] in patients who received vedolizumab, infliximab, and adalimumab, respectively. Rate of biological-related adverse events warranting discontinuation of therapy was 12.2%, 32.9%, and 23.0% for the vedolizumab, infliximab, and adalimumab groups, respectively.
CONCLUSION
Vedolizumab and anti-TNF-α agents demonstrated a clinical benefit in the treatment of steroid-refractory microscopic colitis and with a tolerable safety profile. Future randomized controlled trials are needed to compare vedolizumab with TNF-α inhibitors and examine treatment effect on patients' quality of life.
PubMed: 37668427
DOI: 10.1097/MCG.0000000000001914 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2023Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors have emerged as a progressively utilized therapeutic approach for the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, the complete...
Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors have emerged as a progressively utilized therapeutic approach for the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, the complete determination of their cardiovascular safety remains inconclusive. Hence, the primary objective of this network meta-analysis is to meticulously assess and juxtapose the cardiovascular risks linked to distinct JAK inhibitors employed in RA patients. A systematic review and network meta-analysis were meticulously conducted, encompassing a collection of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that focused on investigating the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and all-cause mortality associated with Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors administered to patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Extensive exploration was performed across multiple electronic databases, incorporating studies published until March 2023. To be included in this analysis, the RCTs were required to involve adult participants diagnosed with RA who received treatment with JAK inhibitors. To ensure accuracy, two authors independently undertook the selection of eligible RCTs and meticulously extracted aggregate data. In order to examine the outcomes of MACE and all-cause mortality, a frequentist graph theoretical approach within network meta-analyses was employed, utilizing random-effects models. Third study has been registered on PROSPERO under the reference CRD42022384611. A specific selection encompassing a total of 14 meticulously chosen randomized controlled trials was undertaken, wherein 13,524 patients were assigned randomly to distinct treatment interventions. The analysis revealed no notable disparity in the occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) between the interventions and the placebo group. However, in comparison to adalimumab, the employment of JAK inhibitors exhibited an association with higher rates of all-cause mortality [odds ratio (OR): 1.7, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.02-2.81]. This observed increase in risk primarily stemmed from the usage of tofacitinib (OR: 1.9, 95% CI: 1.12-3.23). None of the other JAK inhibitors exhibited a statistically significant variance in all-cause mortality when compared to adalimumab. Our study suggests that JAK inhibitors may not increase the risk of MACE in RA patients but may be associated with a higher risk of all-cause mortality compared to adalimumab, primarily due to tofacitinib use. Rheumatologists should carefully consider the cardiovascular risks when prescribing JAK inhibitors, particularly tofacitinib, for RA patients. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=384611, CRD42022384611.
PubMed: 37614310
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2023.1237234 -
Scientific Reports Aug 2023What is the impact of switching between biologics and biosimilars of adalimumab, etanercept, and infliximab on efficacy and safety for rheumatoid arthritis? A systematic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Impact of switching between reference biologics and biosimilars of tumour necrosis factor inhibitors for rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
What is the impact of switching between biologics and biosimilars of adalimumab, etanercept, and infliximab on efficacy and safety for rheumatoid arthritis? A systematic review and network meta-analysis were performed to compare switching and non-switching groups of treatments. Pooled Risk Relative (RR) or standardised mean differences (SMD) with 95% credible intervals (95% CrIs) were obtained. Seventeen randomized trials with a switching phase involving 6,562 patients were included. Results showed that a single switch from biologics to biosimilars compared to continuing biologics had comparable effects for primary and co-primary outcomes, the American College of Rheumatology criteria with 20% response (ACR20) (7 trials, 1,926 patients, RR 0.98, 95% CrIs 0.93 to 1.03) and the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) (5 trials, 1,609 patients, SMD - 0.07, 95% CrIs - 0.23 to 0.1), and within the equivalence margins: ACR20 [RR 0.94, 1.06] and HAQ-DI [SMD - 0.22, 0.22]. The risk of treatment-emergent adverse events, discontinuation, and positive anti-drug antibodies were comparable after switching. Safety results were imprecise, and the follow-up period might not be sufficient to evaluate long-term effects, especially malignancies. Overall, the practice of single switching between approved biologics and biosimilars of Tumour Necrosis Factor inhibitors is efficacious and safe for rheumatoid arthritis.
Topics: Humans; Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals; Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors; Network Meta-Analysis; Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Infliximab
PubMed: 37607959
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-40222-5 -
Journal of Clinical Rheumatology :... Oct 2023To develop the first evidence-based Pan American League of Associations for Rheumatology (PANLAR) guidelines for the treatment of Takayasu arteritis (TAK).
OBJECTIVE
To develop the first evidence-based Pan American League of Associations for Rheumatology (PANLAR) guidelines for the treatment of Takayasu arteritis (TAK).
METHODS
A panel of vasculitis experts developed a series of clinically meaningful questions addressing the treatment of TAK patients in the PICO (population/intervention/comparator/outcome) format. A systematic literature review was performed by a team of methodologists. The evidence quality was assessed according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations/Assessment/Development/Evaluation) methodology. The panel of vasculitis experts voted each PICO question and made recommendations, which required ≥70% agreement among the voting members.
RESULTS
Eleven recommendations were developed. Oral glucocorticoids are conditionally recommended for newly diagnosed and relapsing TAK patients. The addition of nontargeted synthetic immunosuppressants (e.g., methotrexate, leflunomide, azathioprine, or mycophenolate mofetil) is recommended for patients with newly diagnosed or relapsing disease that is not organ- or life-threatening. For organ- or life-threatening disease, we conditionally recommend tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (e.g., infliximab or adalimumab) or tocilizumab with consideration for short courses of cyclophosphamide as an alternative in case of restricted access to biologics. For patients relapsing despite nontargeted synthetic immunosuppressants, we conditionally recommend to switch from one nontargeted synthetic immunosuppressant to another or to add tumor necrosis factor inhibitors or tocilizumab. We conditionally recommend low-dose aspirin for patients with involvement of cranial or coronary arteries to prevent ischemic complications. We strongly recommend performing surgical vascular interventions during periods of remission whenever possible.
CONCLUSION
The first PANLAR treatment guidelines for TAK provide evidence-based guidance for the treatment of TAK patients in Latin American countries.
Topics: Humans; United States; Takayasu Arteritis; Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors; Rheumatology; Immunosuppressive Agents; Methotrexate
PubMed: 37553869
DOI: 10.1097/RHU.0000000000002004 -
European Review For Medical and... Jul 2023The use of biological drugs to treat ulcerative colitis (UC) represents a clear added value; nevertheless, many patients do not have a sustained response to these drugs.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The comparative efficacy and safety of biologics and small molecules for treating patients with ulcerative colitis in Portugal: a systematic literature review and network meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVE
The use of biological drugs to treat ulcerative colitis (UC) represents a clear added value; nevertheless, many patients do not have a sustained response to these drugs. Small molecules were recently approved for the treatment of UC in Portugal. This network meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of the different therapies, including biological and small molecules, in patients prior exposed to biological treatment.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic review of the literature was performed on January 6, 2022, identifying all the relevant reports about the efficacy and safety of biologics (adalimumab, golimumab, infliximab, vedolizumab, ustekinumab) and small molecules (upadacitinib, filgotinib, tofacitinib) in the treatment of UC in Portugal. Network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted using Bayesian Markov Chain Monte Carlo simulations. Results were presented in median Odds Ratio and Surface Under the Cumulative RAnking (SUCRA) score for each treatment.
RESULTS
Treatment of UC is divided into two phases: induction and maintenance. Upadacitinib 45 mg was the most efficacious therapy in achieving clinical remission and response and endoscopic improvement in the induction phase. Concerning the maintenance phase, upadacitinib 30 mg performed better than ustekinumab formulations in clinical remission and response, and endoscopic improvement. Regarding safety, there were no significant differences between all the drugs included in the analysis.
CONCLUSIONS
This network meta-analysis showed that upadacitinib reflects better efficacy compared to the available treatments for bio-exposed patients with moderate to severe UC. The safety profile is comparable to the other drugs.
Topics: Humans; Colitis, Ulcerative; Ustekinumab; Network Meta-Analysis; Portugal; Bayes Theorem; Biological Factors; Biological Products
PubMed: 37522686
DOI: 10.26355/eurrev_202307_33145 -
BMJ Open Ophthalmology Jun 2023This study aimed to review effectiveness studies comparing two biological anti-tumour necrosis factor agents, adalimumab (ADA) and infliximab (IFX), in the management of...
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to review effectiveness studies comparing two biological anti-tumour necrosis factor agents, adalimumab (ADA) and infliximab (IFX), in the management of autoimmune uveitis.
METHODS
A systematic search was conducted across PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar from 2014 until February 2022. The search included the following keywords "Adalimumab", "Infliximab", "Autoimmune", "Anterior", "Intermediate", "Posterior", "Panuveitis", "Refractory" and "Uveitis". Primary studies comparing both ADA and IFX in a population of autoimmune uveitis patients were considered. Outcomes of interest were measures of response to treatment and incidence of adverse events.
RESULTS
The preliminary literature search generated 7156 references. Six studies fulfilled the eligibility criteria and were included in the final analysis; all were non-randomised, retrospective or observational. The included studies found similar effectiveness and side effect profiles for both ADA and IFX in the management of autoimmune uveitis, however, one did not report effectiveness for each separately, and three were limited to Behcet's disease.
CONCLUSION
ADA and IFX seem to display comparable effectiveness and safety profiles. However, the available evidence remains scarce, of low quality and at high risk of bias. A direct comparison between ADA and IFX through large randomised controlled trials is needed to provide more substantial evidence of equivalence or superiority in uveitis.
Topics: Humans; Adalimumab; Infliximab; Retrospective Studies; Treatment Outcome; Uveitis; Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha; Behcet Syndrome
PubMed: 37493653
DOI: 10.1136/bmjophth-2023-001303 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2023Psoriasis is an immune-mediated disease with either skin or joints manifestations, or both, and it has a major impact on quality of life. Although there is currently no... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Psoriasis is an immune-mediated disease with either skin or joints manifestations, or both, and it has a major impact on quality of life. Although there is currently no cure for psoriasis, various treatment strategies allow sustained control of disease signs and symptoms. The relative benefit of these treatments remains unclear due to the limited number of trials comparing them directly head-to-head, which is why we chose to conduct a network meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the benefits and harms of non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biologics for people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis using a network meta-analysis, and to provide a ranking of these treatments according to their benefits and harms.
SEARCH METHODS
For this update of the living systematic review, we updated our searches of the following databases monthly to October 2022: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic treatments in adults over 18 years with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis, at any stage of treatment, compared to placebo or another active agent. The primary outcomes were: proportion of participants who achieved clear or almost clear skin, that is, at least Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90; proportion of participants with serious adverse events (SAEs) at induction phase (8 to 24 weeks after randomisation).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We conducted duplicate study selection, data extraction, risk of bias assessment, and analyses. We synthesised data using pairwise and network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare treatments and rank them according to effectiveness (PASI 90 score) and acceptability (inverse of SAEs). We assessed the certainty of NMA evidence for the two primary outcomes and all comparisons using CINeMA, as very low, low, moderate, or high. We contacted study authors when data were unclear or missing. We used the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to infer treatment hierarchy, from 0% (worst for effectiveness or safety) to 100% (best for effectiveness or safety).
MAIN RESULTS
This update includes an additional 12 studies, taking the total number of included studies to 179, and randomised participants to 62,339, 67.1% men, mainly recruited from hospitals. Average age was 44.6 years, mean PASI score at baseline was 20.4 (range: 9.5 to 39). Most studies were placebo-controlled (56%). We assessed a total of 20 treatments. Most (152) trials were multicentric (two to 231 centres). One-third of the studies (65/179) had high risk of bias, 24 unclear risk, and most (90) low risk. Most studies (138/179) declared funding by a pharmaceutical company, and 24 studies did not report a funding source. Network meta-analysis at class level showed that all interventions (non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biological treatments) showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than placebo. Anti-IL17 treatment showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 compared to all the interventions. Biologic treatments anti-IL17, anti-IL12/23, anti-IL23, and anti-TNF alpha showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than the non-biological systemic agents. For reaching PASI 90, the most effective drugs when compared to placebo were (SUCRA rank order, all high-certainty evidence): infliximab (risk ratio (RR) 49.16, 95% CI 20.49 to 117.95), bimekizumab (RR 27.86, 95% CI 23.56 to 32.94), ixekizumab (RR 27.35, 95% CI 23.15 to 32.29), risankizumab (RR 26.16, 95% CI 22.03 to 31.07). Clinical effectiveness of these drugs was similar when compared against each other. Bimekizumab and ixekizumab were significantly more likely to reach PASI 90 than secukinumab. Bimekizumab, ixekizumab, and risankizumab were significantly more likely to reach PASI 90 than brodalumab and guselkumab. Infliximab, anti-IL17 drugs (bimekizumab, ixekizumab, secukinumab, and brodalumab), and anti-IL23 drugs except tildrakizumab were significantly more likely to reach PASI 90 than ustekinumab, three anti-TNF alpha agents, and deucravacitinib. Ustekinumab was superior to certolizumab. Adalimumab, tildrakizumab, and ustekinumab were superior to etanercept. No significant difference was shown between apremilast and two non-biological drugs: ciclosporin and methotrexate. We found no significant difference between any of the interventions and the placebo for the risk of SAEs. The risk of SAEs was significantly lower for participants on methotrexate compared with most of the interventions. Nevertheless, the SAE analyses were based on a very low number of events with very low- to moderate-certainty evidence for all the comparisons. The findings therefore have to be viewed with caution. For other efficacy outcomes (PASI 75 and Physician Global Assessment (PGA) 0/1), the results were similar to the results for PASI 90. Information on quality of life was often poorly reported and was absent for several of the interventions.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Our review shows that, compared to placebo, the biologics infliximab, bimekizumab, ixekizumab, and risankizumab were the most effective treatments for achieving PASI 90 in people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis on the basis of high-certainty evidence. This NMA evidence is limited to induction therapy (outcomes measured from 8 to 24 weeks after randomisation), and is not sufficient for evaluating longer-term outcomes in this chronic disease. Moreover, we found low numbers of studies for some of the interventions, and the young age (mean 44.6 years) and high level of disease severity (PASI 20.4 at baseline) may not be typical of patients seen in daily clinical practice. We found no significant difference in the assessed interventions and placebo in terms of SAEs, and the safety evidence for most interventions was very low to moderate quality. More randomised trials directly comparing active agents are needed, and these should include systematic subgroup analyses (sex, age, ethnicity, comorbidities, psoriatic arthritis). To provide long-term information on the safety of treatments included in this review, an evaluation of non-randomised studies is needed. Editorial note: This is a living systematic review. Living systematic reviews offer a new approach to review updating, in which the review is continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.
Topics: Adult; Male; Humans; Female; Ustekinumab; Methotrexate; Infliximab; Network Meta-Analysis; Systematic Reviews as Topic; Psoriasis; Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha; Biological Products
PubMed: 37436070
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011535.pub6 -
Digestive and Liver Disease : Official... Mar 2024A systematic review and a meta-analysis of the literature was conducted to assess efficacy and safety of proactive therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) versus conventional... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
A systematic review and a meta-analysis of the literature was conducted to assess efficacy and safety of proactive therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) versus conventional management during maintenance treatment with anti-tumour necrosis factor (anti-TNFα) in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).
METHODS
A search was conducted up to January 2022 (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library). The primary outcome was the ability to maintain clinical remission at 12 months. The certainty of evidence was determined using the GRADE approach.
RESULTS
Nine studies were identified: one systematic review, six randomised clinical trials, and two cohort studies. No superior efficacy of proactive TDM [relative risk 1.16; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.98-1.37, n=528; I=55%] was shown. Proactive TDM could improve the durability of anti-TNFα treatment [odds ratio (OR) 0.12; 95%CI: 0.05-0.27; n=390; I=45%), prevent acute infusion reactions (OR 0.21; 95%CI: 0.05-0.82; n=390; I=0%), decrease adverse events (OR 0.38; 95%CI: 0.15-0.98; n=390; I=14%), and reduce the probability of surgery, at lower economical expenditure.
CONCLUSIONS
The analysed evidence did not confirm the superiority of proactive TDM of anti-TNFα treatment over conventional management in patients with IBD, so proactive TDM should not currently be recommended.
Topics: Humans; Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors; Drug Monitoring; Inflammatory Bowel Diseases; Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha; Remission Induction; Infliximab
PubMed: 37422409
DOI: 10.1016/j.dld.2023.06.028 -
Drugs Jul 2023Budesonide is accepted as first-choice therapy for microscopic colitis (MC); however, symptoms often recur and some patients may be dependent, intolerant, or even fail... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Budesonide is accepted as first-choice therapy for microscopic colitis (MC); however, symptoms often recur and some patients may be dependent, intolerant, or even fail budesonide. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the effectiveness of non-budesonide therapies (thiopurines, bismuth subsalicylate [BSS], bile acid sequestrants [BAS], loperamide and biologics) for MC suggested by international guidelines.
METHODS
We searched the CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE databases from their inception to 18 April 2023 for the above-mentioned therapeutics in MC. We pooled the response and remission rates by medication using a random-effects model.
RESULTS
Twenty-five studies comprising 1475 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Treatment with BSS showed the highest response rate of 75% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.65-0.83; I = 70.12%), with 50% achieving remission of symptoms (95% CI 0.35-0.65; I = 71.06%). Treatment with tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors (infliximab and adalimumab) demonstrated a response rate of 73% (95% CI 0.63-0.83; I = 0.00%), with a remission rate of 44% (95% CI 0.32-0.56; I = 0.00%). The response rate for those treated with vedolizumab was similar; 73% responded to treatment (95% CI 0.57-0.87; I = 35.93%), with a remission rate of 56% (95% CI 0.36-0.75; I = 46.30%). Loperamide was associated with response and remission rates of 62% (95% CI 0.43-0.80; I = 92.99%) and 14% (95% CI 0.07-0.25), respectively, whereas BAS use was associated with response and remission rates of 60% (95% CI 0.51-0.68; I = 61.65%) and 29% (95% CI 0.12-0.55), respectively. Finally, the outcomes for thiopurine use were 49% (95% CI 0.27-0.71; I = 81.45%) and 38% (95% CI 0.23-0.54; I = 50.05%), respectively DISCUSSION: The present systematic review and meta-analysis provides rates of effectiveness of non-budesonide therapies for MC based on available data in the field. Studies in the meta-analysis showed a large amount of heterogeneity due to the variability in assessing the clinical effects of intervention between the studies caused by differences in the definitions of response or remission rates between the studies included. This may likely result in overestimating the benefit of a treatment. Furthermore, the number of participants and drug dosages varied, and only a few studies applied disease-specific activity indices. Only one randomized controlled trial (RCT) was identified. All other 24 included studies were either case series or (retrospective) cohort studies, which complicated efforts to perform further sensitivity analyses to adjust for potential confounders and risk of bias. In addition, the overall evidence on the effect of these treatment options was judged as low, mostly due to comparability bias and the observational nature of the available studies, which limited statistically robust comparisons of rates of effectiveness of the different non-budesonide agents ranked against each other. However, our observational findings may inform clinicians regarding the most rational selection of non-budesonide therapies to patients with MC.
CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION
PROSPERO protocol #CRD42020218649.
Topics: Humans; Budesonide; Loperamide; Salicylates; Colitis, Microscopic
PubMed: 37358712
DOI: 10.1007/s40265-023-01914-4