Rousseau, Alexandra

ABSTRACT Background and Aims Pruritus is a frequent and debilitating symptom in primary biliary cholangitis (PBC), substantially impairing sleep, mood and quality of life. Peroxisome proliferator‐activated receptor (PPAR) agonists are promising second‐line therapies for patients with an inadequate response to ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA). We conducted a systematic review and meta‐analysis to evaluate the efficacy of PPAR agonists on pruritus and health‐related quality of life (HRQoL) in PBC. Methods We systematically searched for randomised placebo‐controlled trials (RCTs) of PPAR agonists in PBC through December 2025. Eligible studies reported validated pruritus or HRQoL outcomes. Main outcomes were NRS and PBC‐40 total score. Pooled estimates were calculated using random‐effects models and expressed as mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results Five RCTs evaluating bezafibrate, elafibranor and seladelpar ( n = 660; 390 PPAR agonist; 270 placebo) met the inclusion criteria. For pruritus intensity analyses, data were restricted to participants with moderate‐to‐severe baseline symptoms (NRS ≥ 4) when available. PPAR agonists significantly reduced NRS scores at 3 months (MD, −1.39; 95% CI: −2.49 to −0.29), 6 months (MD, −1.17; 95% CI: −1.96 to −0.38) and 12 months (MD, −1.73; 95% CI, −3.00 to −0.46); in individual agent analyses, bezafibrate and seladelpar reached statistical significance at two or more time points. While improvements were also noted in PBC‐40 itch‐domain and 5D‐itch score, an impact on overall HRQoL as reflected by PBC‐40 total score could not be demonstrated, with a lower level of certainty. Conclusions PPAR agonists, notably bezafibrate and seladelpar, reduce pruritus severity in PBC patients with moderate‐to‐severe symptoms and consistently improve itch‐specific outcomes. However, effects on global HRQoL remain uncertain. These findings underscore the incorporation of validated, symptom‐focused endpoints in future PBC trials.

Background and Aims: Primary biliary cholangitis is a chronic cholestatic liver disease that may progress to cirrhosis and liver failure. For patients with inadequate response or intolerance to ursodeoxycholic acid, peroxisome proliferator–activated receptor (PPAR) agonists have emerged as second-line options. This study assessed the comparative effectiveness and safety of PPAR agonists in primary biliary cholangitis through a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Approach and Results: A systematic review identified randomized controlled trials evaluating PPAR agonists versus ursodeoxycholic acid, with or without placebo. A frequentist network meta-analysis assessed biochemical response (primary outcome) and ALP normalization (secondary outcome). Pairwise meta-analyses were performed for percentage change in ALP and total bilirubin, and adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation. Data were stratified by baseline ALP, and a random-effects model was used. Eight randomized controlled trials (727 participants) evaluating 4 PPAR agonists were included. All agents outperformed placebo in achieving biochemical response and ALP normalization. Bezafibrate ranked highest for the primary outcome; both bezafibrate and seladelpar ranked highest for the secondary outcome. Percentage ALP reduction did not vary by baseline ALP. Total bilirubin changes were similar across arms, and treatment discontinuations due to adverse events were infrequent. Conclusions: PPAR agonists are effective second-line therapies for primary biliary cholangitis. Treatment ranking differences likely reflect variations in outcomes, populations, and drug mechanisms. In the absence of head-to-head trials, network meta-analysis provides important insights into comparative effectiveness. Further studies are warranted to confirm long-term safety and improve the evaluation of patient-centered outcomes.