Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37229320›Full record

ArticleExperimental and therapeutic medicine2023

Efficacy and safety of vedolizumab in the treatment of patients with inflammatory bowel disease: A systematic review and meta‑analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Hui-Jun Tang, Cai-Qun Bie, Li-Liangzi Guo, Li-Xian Zhong, Shao-Hui Tang

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Experimental and therapeutic medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Practical guidelines on medical management of adults with moderate-to-severe inflammatory bowel disease.Saudi journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Saudi Gastroenterology Association · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Hui-Jun TangDepartment of Gastroenterology, Shenzhen Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine Hospital, Shenzhen, Guangdong 518104, P.R. China.
Cai-Qun BieDepartment of Gastroenterology, Shenzhen Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine Hospital, Shenzhen, Guangdong 518104, P.R. China.
Li-Liangzi GuoDepartment of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital, Jinan University, Guangzhou, Guangdong 510632, P.R. China.
Li-Xian ZhongDepartment of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital, Jinan University, Guangzhou, Guangdong 510632, P.R. China.
Shao-Hui TangDepartment of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital, Jinan University, Guangzhou, Guangdong 510632, P.R. China.
First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Few studies have thoroughly assessed the efficacy and safety of vedolizumab (VDZ) in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to further evaluate this association. PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane databases were searched until April 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy and safety of VDZ in the treatment of IBD were included. The risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated for each outcome using a random effects model. A total of 12 RCTs, including 4,865 patients, met the inclusion criteria. In the induction phase, VDZ was more effective than placebo for patients with ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease (CD) in clinical remission (RR=2.09; 95% CI=1.66-2.62) and clinical response (RR=1.54; 95% CI=1.34-1.78). In the maintenance therapy group, VDZ reached higher clinical remission (RR=1.98; 95% CI=1.58-2.49) and clinical response (RR=1.78; 95% CI=1.40-2.26) rates compared with the placebo group. VDZ particularly improved clinical remission (RR=2.07; 95% CI=1.48-2.89) and clinical response (RR=1.84; 95% CI=1.54-2.21) in patients with TNF antagonist failure. In terms of corticosteroid-free remission, VDZ was also more effective than placebo in patients with IBD (RR=1.98; 95% CI=1.51-2.59). In Crohn's patients, VDZ was more effective than placebo in terms of mucosal healing (RR=1.78; 95% CI=1.27-2.51). With respect to adverse events, VDZ significantly reduced the risk of IBD exacerbation compared with the placebo (RR=0.60; 95% CI=0.39-0.93; P=0.023). However, when compared with the placebo, VDZ increased the risk of nasopharyngitis in patients with CD (RR=1.77; 95% CI=1.01-3.10; P=0.045). No significant differences in other adverse events were observed. Although there might be underlying risk, such as selection bias, in the present study it can be safely concluded that VDZ is a safe and effective biological agent for IBD, particularly for patients with TNF antagonist failure.

Indexed as

inflammatory bowel diseasemeta-analysisrandomized controlled trialsvedolizumab

Identifiers

PMID37229320
PMCPMC10203751
OpenAlexW4372338225

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.