ArticleTherapeutic advances in gastroenterology2024
Retrospective subgroup analysis of fecal microbiota, live-jslm (REBYOTA
Article in Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy Outcomes of Fecal Microbiota, Live-jslm in Preventing Recurrent Clostridioides difficile Infection from Seven Clinical Studies.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2026Review
- Newer Therapeutics to Selectively KillInfectious disease reports · 2026Review
- Safety and effectiveness of fecal microbiota, live-jslm (REBYOTATherapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Fecal microbiota, live-jslm (RBL; REBYOTA Objectives: Evaluate the safety and efficacy of RBL administration Design: Retrospective analysis of electronic medical records of participants administered RBL Methods: The number of participants with treatment and/or procedure-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was evaluated. Treatment success and sustained clinical response, defined as the absence of CDI recurrence within 8 weeks and 6 months, respectively, were evaluated. Results: TEAEs were experienced by 75% (6/8) of participants; most were mild to moderate in severity, and none due to RBL or its administration. Most participants had treatment success (80%; 8/10); 75% (6/8) had sustained clinical response. Conclusion: Real-world safety and efficacy of RBL administered Graphical abstract:
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.