Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25933126›Full record

SynthesisEuropean journal of gastroenterology & hepatology2015

Characterizing unmet medical need and the potential role of new biologic treatment options in patients with ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease: a systematic review and clinician surveys.

Jason P Gordon, Phil C McEwan, Andy Maguire, Daniel M Sugrue, Jorge Puelles

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European journal of gastroenterology & hepatology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 28 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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.

NCT03885713 phase4completednot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

Identification of Predictive Biomarkers for Response to Biologic Therapies and Tofacitinib in Inflammatory Bowel Disease by Proteomic and Mass Cytometry Approaches

TypeinterventionalSponsorFundación de Investigación Biomédica - Hospital Universitario de La PrincesaRan2019 to 2024Enrolled180ConditionsInflammatory Bowel Diseases, Crohn Disease, Ulcerative ColitisArmsInfliximab or adalimumab or golimumab or vedolizumab or ustekinumab or tofacitinib
NCT05313620 phase4recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Effect of Tofacitinib on Coagulation and Platelet Function, and Its Role in Thromboembolic Events

TypeinterventionalSponsorFundación de Investigación Biomédica - Hospital Universitario de La PrincesaRan2022 to 2025Enrolled30ConditionsUlcerative Colitis, ThromboembolismArmsTofacitinib, Infliximab Adalimumab y Golimumab
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Jason P GordonaHealth Economics and Outcomes Research Ltd, Monmouth bSwansea Centre for Health Economics, Swansea University, Wales cOxon Epidemiology dTakeda Pharmaceuticals, Takeda Development Centre, London, UK eUniversity of Adelaide, Department of Public Health, Adelaide, Australia.
Phil C McEwan
Andy Maguire
Daniel M Sugrue
Jorge Puelles
Health Economics and Outcomes Research (United Kingdom) · GBMRC Epidemiology Unit · GBSwansea University · GBTakeda (United Kingdom) · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesComparative outcomes of patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD) prescribed a biologic therapy are inconclusive. The aim of this research was to characterize the degree of unmet medical need in patients with UC or CD and to identify the potential role for new therapies.

methodsA systematic literature review was undertaken of studies reporting outcomes associated with the use of existing biologic therapies in patients with UC or CD, focusing on the nature and rate of treatment failure. To complement the systematic review, contemporaneous data were obtained from a survey of practising gastroenterologists in the UK and France. Data were qualitatively combined in a narrative framework to evaluate the degree of unmet medical need among patients with UC or CD.

resultsStudies identified in the systematic review (n = 120) were heterogeneous, particularly with respect to the definitions of treatment failure; estimates of treatment failure were high but uncertain. On the basis of standardized definitions, estimates of treatment failure provided by clinicians (n = 102) were high, and they were higher for second-line treatment failure (primary: ≤ 37%; secondary: ≤ 41%) compared with first-line treatment failure (primary: ≤ 26%; secondary: ≤ 28%). The majority of the systematic review and survey data were reflective of outcomes with infliximab and adalimumab.

conclusionHigh treatment failure rates associated with existing biologics, identified by the review and clinician surveys, indicate a need for other biologic treatment options to improve the management and outcomes for people with UC and CD. Outcomes associated with existing and new biologic treatments should be investigated in head-to-head randomized trials in the context of their likely uses in clinical practice.

Indexed as

AdalimumabColitis, UlcerativeCrohn DiseaseEvidence-Based MedicineGastrointestinal AgentsHumansInfliximabTreatment FailureTreatment OutcomeAdalimumabGastrointestinal AgentsInfliximab

Identifiers

PMID25933126
PMCPMC4892747
OpenAlexW1990402037

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.