SynthesisFrontiers in immunology2026
Dupilumab treatment outcomes in bullous pemphigoid: a systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in immunology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Targeting type 2 inflammation in dermatology: mechanisms and clinical implications.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Thematic Evolution and Diversification of Bullous Pemphigoid Research: A Bibliometric Analysis, 1959-2025.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Bullous pemphigoid (BP) is the most common autoimmune subepidermal bullous disease of the skin. Novel biologic agents represent a potential therapeutic option. We explore the use of dupilumab in the treatment of BP. Methods: Relevant studies published up to Oct. 20th, 2025 were systematically searched using PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library. Proportion rates of complete response and disease control were analyzed to determine treatment effects. Data were quantitatively synthesized using a random-effects meta-analysis. Meanwhile, we also conducted statistics on adverse events. Results: A total of 587 patients from 24 studies were included. Pooled analysis revealed a complete response rate of 68% (95% CI 60%∼78%) and disease control rate of 95% (95%CI 92%~98%) in BP treated with dupilumab with/without other systemic therapy. Notably, complete response rate achieved 63% (95% CI 49%∼81%) in patients with dupilumab without other systemic therapy. A total of 112 adverse events were reported in 97 patients. Most adverse events were mild and did not lead to treatment discontinuation. Conclusion: This meta-analysis highlights the efficacy and safety of dupilumab in patients with BP, offering valuable evidence to guide future clinical practice. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD420251048550.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.