Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 5, 2026

Partial Bile Duct Ligation in the Mouse: A Controlled Model of Localized Obstructive Cholestasis
Published on: March 28, 2018
Pharmacological interventions for primary biliary cholangitis: an attempted network meta-analysis
Francesca Saffioti1,2, Kurinchi Selvan Gurusamy3, Leonardo Henry Eusebi4,5
1Sheila Sherlock Liver Centre, Royal Free Hospital and the UCL Institute of Liver and Digestive Health, Pond Street, Hampstead, London, UK, NW3 2QG.
This review found no evidence that current pharmacological treatments benefit primary biliary cholangitis (PBC). More high-quality, long-term trials are needed to determine effective interventions for this chronic liver disease.
Area of Science:
- Hepatology
- Clinical Pharmacology
- Evidence Synthesis
Background:
- Primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) is a chronic liver disease characterized by bile duct destruction, leading to cholestasis, fibrosis, and cirrhosis.
- The optimal pharmacological treatment for PBC remains uncertain, necessitating a comprehensive review of available interventions.
Purpose of the Study:
- To conduct a network meta-analysis comparing the benefits and harms of pharmacological interventions for PBC.
- To rank interventions based on safety and efficacy, aiming to clarify optimal treatment strategies.
Main Methods:
- A systematic search of multiple databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, etc.) identified randomized clinical trials up to February 2017.
- Standard Cochrane methodology was employed for data collection and analysis, including risk of bias assessment and GRADE quality evaluation.
- Due to heterogeneity, a network meta-analysis was not performed; instead, standard comparative methods were used.
Main Results:
- 74 trials (5902 participants) were identified; 46 provided outcome data. All trials had a high risk of bias, with evidence quality rated as low or very low.
- Methotrexate showed a potential increase in mortality (low quality evidence), while azathioprine showed a potential decrease (low quality evidence, but with unreliable results).
- D-penicillamine and obeticholic acid plus UDCA showed increased serious adverse events compared to no intervention or UDCA alone, respectively (low quality evidence).
Conclusions:
- Current evidence, of very low quality, suggests no definitive benefit from any pharmacological intervention for PBC.
- Significant uncertainty exists due to short follow-up periods and high risk of bias in included trials.
- Further well-designed, adequately powered randomized clinical trials with longer follow-up and clinically relevant outcomes are essential for establishing effective PBC treatments.
Related Concept Videos
Inflammatory Bowel Disease IV: Pharmacological Management
Pharmacologic...
Effect of Hepatic Disease on Pharmacokinetics: Pathophysiologic Assessment and Liver Function Test
Chronic Pancreatitis II: Collaborative Care
Assessment:
Indirect-Acting Cholinergic Agonists: Pharmacological Actions
At the neuromuscular junction, these agents work by inhibiting the breakdown of acetylcholine, allowing it to remain bound to the receptor and bind to nearby receptors. This process leads to repetitive firing of the endplate, causing muscle...
Direct-Acting Cholinergic Agonists: Therapeutic Uses
Peripheral Artery Disease III: Interprofessional Care
