ArticleFrontline gastroenterology2020
Optimising IBD patient selection for de-escalation of anti-TNF therapy to immunomodulator maintenance.
Article in Frontline gastroenterology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Is Deep Remission the Right Time to De-Escalate Biologic Therapy in IBD? A Single-Center Retrospective Study.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Low-Dose Azathioprine in Combination with Allopurinol: The Past, Present and Future of This Useful Duo.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2022Review
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveInflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is increasingly managed with the use of biologic therapies. National guidelines (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE)) suggest considering cessation after 1 year of therapy but lack detailed criteria for this. We aimed to describe clinical outcomes from the introduction of a biologic review panel (BRP) to implement modified criteria for cessation of antitumour necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapy and step down to single-agent immunomodulator.
designRetrospective review of patient outcomes following BRP implementation. PATIENTS: All patients on biologic therapy discussed in the BRP within a 5-year period.
settingSingle IBD network covering three hospital sites.
interventionsModified criteria for biologic cessation were based on published evidence; they excluded individuals with no suitable maintenance immunomodulator, previous surgery or evidence of active disease, additional indications for anti-TNF therapy and previous relapse on biologic cessation. All patients with IBD on a biologic were discussed at the BRP.
main outcome measuresRelapse following IBD cessation and relative cost of BRP.
results136 patients with IBD were reviewed, with 45 patients meeting the NICE guideline criteria for cessation. The BRP and modified criteria affected decision to withdraw therapy in 38% of these. Therapy was withdrawn in 27 patients, with a 20% 24-month relapse rate. Younger age at cessation was significantly associated with relapse (p=0.01).
conclusionThe BRP approach has proved a safe and effective means of decision making in stopping biologic therapy. Future work to inform exclusion criteria is required.
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.