MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4207013010 · doi:10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjab232.637

P510 Comparative efficacy of biologic therapies for inducing response and remission in fistulizing Crohn’s disease; Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

2022· article· en· W4207013010 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Shehab, Fatema Alrashed, Valérie Heron, Sophie Restellini, Talat Bessissow

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Crohn s and Colitis · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVedolizumabMedicineInfliximabInternal medicineAdalimumabUstekinumabCrohn's diseasePlaceboOdds ratioMeta-analysisRandomized controlled trialConfidence intervalGastroenterologyDiseasePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background The management of patients with fistulising Crohn’s disease (CD) is challenging. Several biologics have been used for the treatment of fistulising CD over the last two decades. We aimed to compare the efficacy of biologic therapies in inducing response and remission in fistulising Crohn’s disease. Methods Systematic searches were made of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane Central databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to November 2021 that assessed the efficacy of infliximab, adalimumab, certolizumab, vedolizumab, or ustekinumab against placebo or an active agent for induction of response or remission in adult Crohn’s patients with fistulising disease. Primary outcome was proportion of patients with fistula response or remission as defined by each RCT. Pairwise treatment effects were estimated through a Bayesian random-effects network meta-analysis and reported as odds ratios (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Results Ten studies were included in the analysis. Main analysis showed that there was no statistical difference in inducting remission between infliximab, adalimumab, certolizumab, vedolizumab and ustekinumab. Anti-TNFs were superior to placebo in inducing response [OR= 0.51 (95% CI 0.35; 0.750] and remission [OR= 0.36 (95% CI 0.22; 0.58)]. Infliximab was superior to placebo in inducing response [OR= 0.36 (95% CI 0.17; 0.75)] and remission [OR=0.17 (95% CI 0.03; 0.87)]. Ustekinumab was superior to placebo in inducing response [OR=0.48 (95% CI 0.26; 0.860] but not remission [OR=0.50 (95% CI 0.13; 1.93)]. Vedolizumab was not superior to placebo in inducting remission [OR=0.32 (95% CI 0.04; 2.29)]. Certolizumab was not superior to placebo in inducting response [OR=0.78 (95% CI 0.40; 1.55)] or remission [OR= 0.78 (95% CI 0.40; 1.55)]. Infliximab was superior to adalimumab in inducting response [OR=0.24 (95% CI 0.06; 0.99)] but not remission [OR=0.31 (95% CI 0.04; 2.27)]. Conclusion In patients with fistulising Crohn’s disease, anti-TNFs are effective in inducing response and remission. Infliximab was superior to adalimumab in inducing response but not remission. No difference among various biologics was observed for inducing remission. These data highlight the need for dedicated studies to assess the efficacy of biologics in fistulising Crohn’s disease.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.090
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.157

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.090
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0230.048
Bibliometrics0.0120.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.271 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Crohn s and Colitis→Same topicInflammatory Bowel Disease→French-language works237,207→