ReviewCureus2023
Comparison of Effectiveness and Safety of Ustekinumab and Adalimumab As Induction or Maintenance Therapy in Patients With Moderate to Severe Crohn's Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Adalimumab Therapy for Crohn's Disease and Axial Spondyloarthritis in Latent Tuberculosis:Sultan Qaboos University medical journal · 2026Pooled it
- Advancements in Targeted Therapies for the Management of Crohn's Disease: A Comprehensive Review.Cureus · 2024Review
- Unraveling the role of autophagy regulation in Crohn's disease: from genetic mechanisms to potential therapeutics.Advanced biotechnology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 7 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This meta-analysis has been conducted to compare ustekinumab and adalimumab as induction or maintenance therapy in patients with moderate to severe Crohn's disease (CD). The current meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Two investigators independently searched online databases including PubMed, Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and Cochrane Library for relevant articles published up to April 2023. The initial search terms were "ustekinumab," "adalimumab," and "Crohn's disease". Three studies (with a total of 612 patients) were included in the present meta-analysis. We did not find any significant difference in clinical remission (OR: 1.31, 95% CI: 0.68-2.52), clinical response (OR: 1.39, 95% CI: 0.39-4.91), endoscopic remission (OR: 1.56, 95% CI: 0.66-3.64), and steroid-free remission (OR: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.67-1.42) between patients who received ustekinumab and patients who received adalimumab. In conclusion, this meta-analysis provides valuable insights into the efficacy and safety of ustekinumab and adalimumab in the treatment of moderate to severe CD. Our findings indicate that both drugs have similar effectiveness in achieving clinical remission, clinical response, radiological remission and steroid-free remission.
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.