ArticleInternational journal of clinical and experimental medicine2015
Effectiveness and risk associated with infliximab alone and in combination with immunosuppressors for Crohn's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in International journal of clinical and experimental medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Old and New Biological Therapies for Psoriasis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveInfliximab (IFX) monotherapy and IFX combined with immunosuppressors have been used in the treatment of Crohn's disease. However, the differences between combination therapy and IFX alone remain controversial. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness and risk associated with combination therapy and IFX monotherapy.
methodsSystematic searches were performed for randomized controlled trials with PubMed, Web of Science, OVID, and the Cochrane Library. The analyzed contents included induction of remission, short-term maintenance of remission, long-term maintenance of remission, and risks. The final results were estimated using statistical data of odds ratio (OR), relevant 95% confidence interval (CI), and P value.
results6 out of 1041 citations met the selection criteria. There was no statistical difference in the effectiveness of induction and long-term maintenance of remission between two groups (P=0.07, 0.12). However, for short-term maintenance of remission, there was mild statistical difference between two groups (P=0.02, OR=1.66). For risks, apart from the difference in the aspect of reaction to infusion (OR=0.43, 95% CI=0.29-0.65, P<0.0001), there was no statistical difference.
conclusionsThere was no significant difference in effectiveness and risks between the therapy groups. However, these outcomes should be interpreted with caution. Specific categories of combination therapy and periodic medication should be paid more attention in future studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26131059PMC4483967W881181496What OpenQuestion holds
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.