Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24491514›Full record

SynthesisJournal of Crohn's & colitis2014

Adalimumab versus infliximab for the treatment of moderate to severe ulcerative colitis in adult patients naïve to anti-TNF therapy: an indirect treatment comparison meta-analysis.

Kristian Thorlund, Eric Druyts, Edward J Mills, Richard N Fedorak, John K Marshall

RetractedErratum issuedOpen access · bronzeAbstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of Crohn's & colitis, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 36 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
7.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 74 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Serum TGF-Journal of immunology research · 2023
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Efficacies of first and second tumor necrosis factor inhibitors in refractory ulcerative colitis patients in real-world practice.Indian journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology · 2020
    Article
  19. Observational
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

  • Expression of concern · 2022-01-24Civil Proceedings · Concerns/Issues about Data · Concerns/Issues about Results and/or Conclusions · Legal Reasons and/or Threats · · See also: https://doi.org/10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjab225 Journal was previously published by Elsevier until 2015.
  • Commented on by
  • Erratum issued
5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Kristian ThorlundDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada; Stanford Prevention Research Center, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States. Electronic address: thorluk@mcmaster.ca.
Eric DruytsFaculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Edward J MillsStanford Prevention Research Center, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States; Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Richard N FedorakDivision of Gastroenterology, University of Alberta, Canada.
John K MarshallDivision of Gastroenterology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
McMaster University · CAStanford University · USUniversity of Alberta · CAUniversity of Ottawa · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare the efficacy of adalimumab and infliximab for the treatment of moderate to severe ulcerative colitis using indirect treatment comparison meta-analysis.

methodsA systematic review and Bayesian indirect treatment comparison meta-analyses were performed for seven patient-important clinical outcomes at 8 weeks and 52 weeks. Odds ratio (OR) estimates and associated 95% credible intervals (CrIs) were produced.

resultsFive eligible RCTs informed clinical remission, response, mucosal healing, quality of life, colectomy, serious adverse events, and discontinuation due to adverse events at 8 weeks and 52 weeks. At 8 weeks of induction therapy, clinical remission (OR=0.42, 95% CrI 0.17-0.97), clinical response (OR=0.45, 95% CrI 0.23-0.89) and mucosal healing (OR=0.46, 95% CrI 0.25-0.86) statistically favored infliximab. However, after 52 weeks of maintenance therapy OR estimates showed no significant difference between infliximab and adalimumab. For serious adverse events and discontinuations due to adverse events, adalimumab and infliximab were similar to placebo. Further, the indirect treatment comparison of adalimumab and infliximab yielded odds ratios close to 1.00 with wide credible intervals.

conclusionThe findings of this indirect treatment comparison meta-analysis suggest that both infliximab and adalimumab are superior to placebo in the treatment of moderate to moderately severe ulcerative colitis. While infliximab is statistically more effective than adalimumab in the induction of remission, response and mucosal healing at 8 weeks, infliximab and adalimumab are comparable in efficacy at 52 weeks of maintenance treatment.

Indexed as

AdalimumabAdultAntibodies, MonoclonalAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAnti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-SteroidalColitis, UlcerativeHumansInfliximabRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSeverity of Illness IndexTumor Necrosis Factor-alphaAdalimumabAntibodies, MonoclonalAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAnti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-SteroidalInfliximabTumor Necrosis Factor-alphaAdalimumabAnti-TNFIndirect treatment comparisonInfliximabMeta-analysisUlcerative colitis

Identifiers

PMID24491514
OpenAlexW2125696595

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.