One-Year Efficacy of Guselkumab Versus Advanced Therapies for the Treatment of Moderately to Severely Active Crohn’s Disease: A Network Meta-Analysis
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This study used network meta-analysis (NMA) to evaluate the comparative efficacy of available advanced therapies for moderately to severely active Crohn’s disease (CD) versus the IL-23 inhibitor guselkumab. A systematic literature review was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of advanced therapies in moderately to severely active CD. Bayesian NMAs were conducted for outcomes of clinical response, clinical remission, endoscopic response, and a combined outcome of clinical remission with endoscopic response, at the end of the maintenance phase (up to 1 year). Primary analyses included patients with varied prior inadequate treatment responses, with additional analyses conducted for specific subgroups. Re-randomized trials were normalized in several cases to mimic a standard treat-through design, incorporating data from additional sources, when necessary, for patients who had an inadequate response or experienced a delayed response following induction. Of the 58 RCTs identified, 13 with maintenance endpoint data were ultimately included in the NMAs. Guselkumab 100 mg and 200 mg were more likely to be effective versus several comparators. Guselkumab 200 mg demonstrated significantly greater efficacy versus infliximab 10 mg/kg every 8 weeks and upadacitinib 30 mg daily for clinical response and clinical remission. For endoscopic response, guselkumab 200 mg showed significantly greater efficacy than ustekinumab, adalimumab, and upadacitinib. Significance was also noted versus ustekinumab on the combined outcome of clinical remission with endoscopic response. Similarly, guselkumab 100 mg demonstrated efficacy versus comparators across analyses. Guselkumab achieved higher rankings based on surface under the cumulative ranking curve. Findings of primary analyses within mixed populations were generally corroborated by subpopulation analyses. Results of this NMA in moderately to severely active CD indicate a higher likelihood of guselkumab achieving each clinical and endoscopic endpoint analyzed at the end of the maintenance phase versus other advanced therapies assessed. A network meta-analysis (NMA) was completed to compare the effectiveness of advanced treatments for Crohn’s disease, a chronic inflammatory condition of the digestive tract. Our NMA focused on the drug guselkumab and how effective it is compared with other treatments for Crohn’s disease. We looked at 4 outcomes related to efficacy that are common in trials: clinical response (improvement in symptoms), clinical remission (disappearance of symptoms), endoscopic response (seen in the digestive tract), and a combined outcome of clinical remission with endoscopic response. Data were analyzed from trials lasting up to 1 year. Patients who had not responded well to prior treatments were included in the analysis. Thirteen trials met all criteria and were included in the analysis. Guselkumab at doses of 100 mg and 200 mg was more effective than several treatments. Guselkumab 200 mg was significantly better than infliximab and upadacitinib for both clinical response and clinical remission. It also showed better results than ustekinumab, adalimumab, and upadacitinib for endoscopic response and was more effective than ustekinumab for the combined outcome of clinical remission with endoscopic response. Our analysis shows that guselkumab is likely to be more effective at achieving both symptom improvement and healing the digestive tract compared with other advanced treatments for moderate to severe Crohn’s disease.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,032 | 0,040 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,017 | 0,058 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,006 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».