SynthesisUnited European gastroenterology journal2023
Has the therapeutical ceiling been reached in Crohn's disease randomized controlled trials? A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in United European gastroenterology journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 3 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Assessment of outcomes in Crohn's disease: A systematic review of randomized clinical trials to inform a multiple outcome framework.United European gastroenterology journal · 2024Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of probiotics in IBD: An overview of systematic reviews and updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.United European gastroenterology journal · 2024Pooled it
- Has the therapeutical ceiling been reached in Crohn's disease randomized controlled trials? A systematic review and meta-analysis.United European gastroenterology journal · 2023Pooled it
- Chimeric antigen receptor T (CAR-T) cell therapy in non-oncological diseases.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2026Review
- Combining Guselkumab with Upadacitinib Is Safe and Effective in the Treatment of Medically Complex Inflammatory Bowel Disease.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2026Article
- Understanding the therapeutic toolkit for inflammatory bowel disease.Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2025Review
- Incorporating Real-World Variability in Clinical IBD Research.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2025Article
- Vedolizumab for Crohn's disease: Real-world efficacy through a meta-analytical lens.United European gastroenterology journal · 2025Article
- Dual Biologic Therapy Induces Remission in Refractory Crohn's Disease With Vedolizumab and Ustekinumab.Crohn's & colitis 360 · 2025Article
- Positioning Guselkumab in The Treatment Algorithm of Patients with Crohn's Disease.Biologics : targets & therapy · 2025Review
- Article
- Immunity in digestive diseases: new drugs for inflammatory bowel disease treatment-insights from Phase II and III trials.Journal of gastroenterology · 2024Review
- UEG Journal's impact and vision for the future.United European gastroenterology journal · 2024Article
- Review
- Upgrading therapeutic ambitions and treatment outcomes.Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2024Article
- Antibodies Targeting the Tumor Necrosis Factor-Like Ligand 1A in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A New Kid on the (Biologics) Block?Digestion · 2024Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsThe availability of biological agents for inflammatory bowel disease has increased over the past years. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to explore time trends in clinical response and clinical remission rates in Crohn's disease (CD) patients treated with biologics while discussing the need for new strategies.
methodsMEDLINE, Cochrane, and ISI Web of Science databases were searched for randomized placebo-controlled trials with biological agents in moderate-to-severe CD patients. Sub-group and meta-regression analyses compared treatment and placebo by calculating the pooled odds ratios of clinical remission and clinical response, across time categories and publication year. We also estimated the proportion of patients achieving clinical remission and clinical response by comparing both groups according to the publication year.
resultsTwenty-five trials were included in the systematic review, which enrolled 8879 patients between 1997 and 2022. The clinical remission and clinical response odds, in induction and maintenance, have been constant over time, as no statistically significant differences were found between time categories (interaction p-values: clinical remission [induction, p = 0.19; maintenance, p = 0.24]; clinical response [induction, p = 0.43; maintenance, p = 0.59]). In meta-regression analyses, publication year did not influence these outcomes (clinical remission [induction, OR 1.01{95% CI 0.97-1.05}, p = 0.72; clinical response [induction, OR 1.01{95% CI 0.97-1.04]; p = 0.63; maintenance, OR 1.03{95% CI 0.98-1.07}; p = 0.21]), with the exception of clinical remission in maintenance studies, which presented a decreased effect (odds ratio 0.97{95% CI 0.94-1.00}, p = 0.03]).
conclusionsOur review highlights that the odds of clinical outcomes in CD patients receiving biological treatment relative to placebo have been stable in the last decades.
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.