SynthesisPloS one2016
Systematic Review with Network Meta-Analysis: Comparative Efficacy of Biologics in the Treatment of Moderately to Severely Active Ulcerative Colitis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
52 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 100 citations in OpenAlex.
- Management of paediatric ulcerative colitis, part 1: Ambulatory care-An updated evidence-based consensus guideline from the European Society of Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition and the European Crohn's and Colitis Organisation.Journal of pediatric gastroenterology and nutrition · 2025Guideline
- Efficacy and Safety of Advanced Therapies in Moderately-to-Severely Active Ulcerative Colitis: a Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.Advances in therapy · 2024Pooled it
- Comparative Efficacy of Subcutaneous and Intravenous Infliximab and Vedolizumab for Maintenance Treatment of TNF-naive Adult Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Literature Review and Network Meta-analysis.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2024Pooled it
- Efficacy, Effectiveness, and Safety of Ustekinumab for the Treatment of Ulcerative Colitis: A Systematic Review.Inflammatory bowel diseases · 2024Pooled it
- Comparative efficacy of advanced treatments in biologic-naïve or biologic-experienced patients with ulcerative colitis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2023Pooled it
- 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 · 2020Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of biologic agents and tofacitinib in moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis: A systematic overview of meta-analyses.United European gastroenterology journal · 2019Pooled it
- Mesenchymal stem cells for the treatment of ulcerative colitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental and clinical studies.Stem cell research & therapy · 2019Pooled it
- Systematic review with meta-analysis: comparative efficacy of biologics for induction and maintenance of mucosal healing in Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis controlled trials.Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics · 2017Pooled it
- Tofacitinib in Patients with Ulcerative Colitis: Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire Items in Phase 3 Randomized Controlled Induction Studies.Inflammatory bowel diseases · 2021Trial
- An inverse probability of treatment weighted comparison between vedolizumab, ustekinumab, and tofacitinib in anti-TNF-experienced ulcerative colitis patients.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Persistence of advanced therapies in patients with ulcerative colitis: real-world data from the nationwide CREdIT registry.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Efficacy of Biologics in Patients with Ulcerative Colitis Exhibiting Non-Response or Insufficient Response to Cytapheresis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- The effectiveness of vedolizumab in advanced therapy-experienced ulcerative colitis patients: Real world data from the Inflammatory Bowel Disease of the Middle East (IBD-ME) Registry group.Saudi journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Saudi Gastroenterology Association · 2025Article
- Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Upadacitinib vs. Vedolizumab, Ustekinumab, and Tofacitinib After Induction and Maintenance for Ulcerative Colitis: Three Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparisons.Advances in therapy · 2024Article
- [Old and New Biologics and Small Molecules in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Anti Integrins].The Korean journal of gastroenterology = Taehan Sohwagi Hakhoe chi · 2024Review
- Review
- Trends in Targeted Therapy Usage in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: TRENDY Study of ENEIDA.Pharmaceutics · 2024Article
- Efficacy of Switching to Adalimumab for Maintenance of Remission Following Induction Therapy with Tacrolimus in Patients with Ulcerative Colitis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Health-Related Quality of Life Outcomes With Tofacitinib Treatment in Patients With Ulcerative Colitis in the Open-Label Extension Study, OCTAVE Open.Inflammatory bowel diseases · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBiological therapies are increasingly used to treat ulcerative colitis (UC).
aimTo compare the efficacy of biologics in adults with moderately-to-severely active UC, stratified by prior exposure to anti-tumour necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapy.
methodsA systematic literature review was undertaken to identify studies of biologics approved for UC. Network meta-analysis was conducted for endpoints at induction and maintenance.
resultsSeven studies were included in the meta-analysis of induction treatment for anti-TNF therapy-naïve patients. All biologics were more effective than placebo in inducing clinical response, clinical remission, and mucosal healing. Infliximab demonstrated a statistically significant improvement over adalimumab in clinical response (odds ratio [OR] [95% credible interval (CrI)]: 2.19 [1.35-3.55]), clinical remission (OR [95% CrI]: 2.81 [1.49-5.49]), and mucosal healing (OR [95% CrI]: 2.23 [1.21-4.14]); there were no other significant differences between biologics for induction efficacy. Five studies were included in the meta-analysis of maintenance treatment, two studies rerandomised responder patients at end of induction, and three followed the same patients 'straight through'. To account for design differences, the number of responders at end of induction was assumed to be equivalent to the number rerandomised. Vedolizumab showed significantly different durable clinical response from comparators (OR [95% CrI] infliximab 3.18 [1.14-9.20], golimumab 2.33 [1.04-5.41], and adalimumab 3.96 [1.67-9.84]). In anti-TNF therapy-experienced patients, only vedolizumab and adalimumab could be compared. At induction, no significant differences in efficacy were seen. During maintenance, vedolizumab showed significantly improved rates of mucosal healing versus adalimumab (OR [95% CrI]: 6.72 [1.36-41.0]).
conclusionsThis study expands the understanding of comparative efficacies of biologic treatments for UC, encompassing outcomes and populations not previously studied. All biologic treatments were effective for UC during induction. Vedolizumab demonstrated possible clinical benefits in the maintenance setting versus all comparators, irrespective of prior anti-TNF exposure and after adjusting for differences in study design.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.