Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34011580›Full record

SynthesisBMJ open2021

Granulocyte and monocyte apheresis as an adjunctive therapy to induce and maintain clinical remission in ulcerative colitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Szabolcs Kiss, Dávid Németh, Péter Hegyi, Mária Földi, Zsolt Szakács, Bálint Erőss, Benedek Tinusz, Péter Jenő Hegyi, Patrícia Sarlós, Hussain Alizadeh

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. IBD barriers across the continents - East Asia.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2023
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Szabolcs KissDoctoral School of Clinical Medicine, University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary.ORCID 0000-0001-5032-866X
Dávid NémethInstitute for Translational Medicine, University of Pécs Medical School, Pécs, Hungary.ORCID 0000-0002-3258-6195
Péter HegyiInstitute for Translational Medicine, University of Pécs Medical School, Pécs, Hungary.ORCID 0000-0003-0399-7259
Mária FöldiDoctoral School of Clinical Medicine, University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary.ORCID 0000-0003-4534-0394
Zsolt SzakácsInstitute for Translational Medicine, University of Pécs Medical School, Pécs, Hungary.ORCID 0000-0002-7035-941X
Bálint ErőssInstitute for Translational Medicine, University of Pécs Medical School, Pécs, Hungary.ORCID 0000-0003-3658-8427
Benedek TinuszDivision of Geriatric Medicine, First Department of Medicine, University of Pécs Medical School, Pécs, Hungary.ORCID 0000-0001-6187-5263
Péter Jenő HegyiInstitute for Translational Medicine, University of Pécs Medical School, Pécs, Hungary.ORCID 0000-0002-6443-0259
Patrícia SarlósInstitute for Translational Medicine, University of Pécs Medical School, Pécs, Hungary.ORCID 0000-0002-5086-9455
Hussain AlizadehDoctoral School of Clinical Medicine, University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary alizadeh.hussain@pte.hu.ORCID 0000-0002-4609-487X
University of Pecs · HUUniversity of Szeged · HU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe goal of treatment in ulcerative colitis (UC) is to induce and maintain remission. The addition of granulocyte and monocyte apheresis (GMA) to conventional therapy may be a promising therapeutic alternative. In this meta-analysis, we aimed to assess the efficacy and safety profile of GMA as an adjunctive therapy.

designSystematic review and meta-analysis.

methodsWe searched four databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) for randomised or minimised controlled trials which discussed the impact of additional GMA therapy on clinical remission induction and clinical remission maintenance compared with conventional therapy alone. Primary outcomes were clinical remission induction and maintenance, secondary outcomes were adverse events (AEs) and steroid-sparing effect. ORs with 95% CIs were calculated. Trial Sequential Analyses were performed to adjusts for the risk of random errors in meta-analyses.

resultsA total of 11 studies were eligible for meta-analysis. GMA was clearly demonstrated to induce and maintain clinical remission more effectively than conventional therapy alone (598 patients: OR: 1.93, 95% CI 1.28 to 2.91, p=0.002, I

conclusionGMA appears to be more effective as an adjunctive treatment in inducing and maintaining remission in patients with UC than conventional therapy alone. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019134050.

Indexed as

Blood Component RemovalColitis, UlcerativeGranulocytesHumansMonocytesRemission Inductiongastroenterologyhaematologyimmunologyinflammatory bowel disease

Identifiers

PMID34011580
PMCPMC8137160
OpenAlexW3160751649

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.