Background: Ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) is the only approved treatment for primary biliary cirrhosis, but its effect on disease progression is uncertain. The aim of this study was to clarify the efficacy of UDCA in primary biliary cirrhosis.
Methods: A systematic review, including the use of meta-analysis, was done for the randomised and switch-over phases of trials comparing UDCA with placebo, obtained from Medline and Embase databases, and from manual searches derived from review articles and abstracts of major international meetings. All trials had more than a mean of 6 months' follow-up and only included patients with primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC) according to established diagnostic criteria.
Findings: 17 relevant articles were identified: 11 randomised controlled trials, including 1272 patients, and six reports of the switch-over phases. UCDA had a favourable effect on liver biochemistry in most of the studies but not on symptoms or the progression of histological stage; two studies did not assess survival, liver transplantation, or complications of liver disease. Meta-analysis showed no difference between UDCA and placebo in the incidence of death (odds ratio 1.21, 95% CI 0.71-2.04), liver related death (0.72, 0.22-2.32), liver transplantation (1.72, 0.78-2.07), death or transplantation (1.26, 0.87-1.82) and in the development of complications of liver disease (1.11, 0.64-1.92). With the primary end-point defined by the authors (a combined end-point in three studies, and death or liver transplantation in the others) an odds ratio of 1.53 (0.97-2.42) was obtained. Assessment of the switch-over phases, during which there was a longer follow-up, did not change the results of the meta-analysis.
Interpretation: Published randomised controlled trials of UDCA do not show evidence of therapeutic benefit in PBC and its use as standard therapy needs to be re-examined.