Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26284562›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology2015

Biologic agents for IBD: practical insights.

Silvio Danese, Lucine Vuitton, Laurent Peyrin-Biroulet

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 169 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
169citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
25.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

169 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 334 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. First- and Second-Line Pharmacotherapies for Patients With Moderate to Severely Active Ulcerative Colitis: An Updated Network Meta-Analysis.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2020
    Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Advances in Crohn's Disease: A Comprehensive Review of Pathophysiology, Diagnosis, and Emerging Therapeutics.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

109 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Silvio DaneseDepartment of Gastroenterology, IBD Centre, Humanitas Research Hospital, Via A. Manzoni 56, 20089 Rozzano, Milan, Italy.
Lucine VuittonDepartment of Gastroenterology, University Hospital of Besançon, 3 Boulevard Fleming, 25030 Besançon, France.
Laurent Peyrin-BirouletInserm U954, and Department of Gastroenterology, University Hospital of Nancy, 5 Rue du Morvan, 54500 Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy, Nancy, France.
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Besançon · FRInserm · FRIRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Six biologic agents are currently approved for the treatment of IBD: four anti-TNF agents (infliximab, adalimumab, golimumab and certolizumab pegol) and two anti-integrin agents (natalizumab and vedolizumab). In Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis refractory to standard medications, treatment choice among available biologic agents can be challenging. Several parameters should be taken into account to help physicians through the decision-making process, including the comparative effectiveness and long-term safety profile, availability and labelling in the prescriber's country, international guidelines, and cost, as well as patient preferences (such as the route of administration). Herein, we provide practical insights on the use of biologic agents in IBD. The results of head-to-head trials between biologic agents are eagerly awaited to guide decision-making regarding the choice of first-line biologic agents and to determine whether switching within the same drug class or swapping (switching out of the drug class) is preferable after primary or secondary loss of response to the first biologic agent. In the near future, treatment algorithms might evolve with the launch of new drugs (such as ustekinumab, tofacitinib and etrolizumab) and the increased use of biosimilars.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsBiological FactorsColitis, UlcerativeCrohn DiseaseDrug LabelingForecastingHumansPatient SatisfactionPractice Guidelines as TopicTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeBiological Factors

Identifiers

PMID26284562
OpenAlexW2198790708

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.