Adalimumab monotherapy versus combination therapy with immunomodulators in patients with Crohn's disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Combination therapy with infliximab and azathioprine has been shown to be superior to either treatment alone in Crohn's disease (CD). However, the benefit of combining adalimumab with an immunomodulator remains controversial. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of adalimumab monotherapy with combination therapy for induction and maintenance of response and remission in CD using a meta-analysis of the current literature. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search using Medline, Embase, Cochrane and several other databases. Prospective randomized controlled trials, retrospective cohort and case-controlled studies were included. The primary outcomes included induction of response and remission (up to week 12), maintenance of clinical response and remission (1 year) and the need for dose escalation. Several subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: Eighteen out of 2743 retrieved studies were included. A meta-analysis of 7 studies assessing induction of remission (n=1984) showed that ADA monotherapy was inferior to combination therapy [OR=0.78 (0.64-0.96), p=0.02]. A meta-analysis of 4 studies revealed that combination therapy was not statistically different from ADA for maintenance of remission [OR=1.08 (0.79-1.48), p=0.48]. Combination therapy was also not different from ADA monotherapy in terms of requirement for dose escalation [OR=1.13 (0.69-1.85), p=0.62]. CONCLUSIONS: Combination therapy with ADA and immunomodulator was mildly superior to ADA monotherapy for induction of remission in CD. The rate of remission at 1 year and the need for dose escalation were similar in both groups. These findings should be interpreted with caution in view of possible confounders and should be further validated by randomized controlled trials.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".