ArticleBMC gastroenterology2024
Comparative efficacy and safety of subcutaneous infliximab and vedolizumab in patients with Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis included in randomised controlled trials.
Article in BMC 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and Safety of Infliximab and Vedolizumab Maintenance Therapy in Patients with Crohn's Disease and Ulcerative Colitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- [Position paper of the Society for Paediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition (GPGE) on the off-label use of biologics and signal inhibitors in children and adolescents with IBD that have already been approved for adults].Zeitschrift fur Gastroenterologie · 2025Article
- Temporal Trends in the Use of Biological Agents in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Real-World Data from a Tertiary Inflammatory Bowel Disease Greek Center During a 5-Year Period.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
17 authors at 14 institutions in 11 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhile indirect comparison of infliximab (IFX) and vedolizumab (VDZ) in adults with Crohn's disease (CD) or ulcerative colitis (UC) shows that IFX has better effectiveness during induction, and comparable efficacy during maintenance treatment, comparative data specific to subcutaneous (SC) IFX (i.e., CT-P13 SC) versus VDZ are limited.
aimPooled analysis of randomised studies to compare efficacy and safety with IFX SC and VDZ in moderate-to-severe inflammatory bowel disease.
methodsParallel-group, randomised studies evaluating IFX SC and VDZ in patients with moderate-to-severe CD or UC were identified. Eligible studies reported ≥ 1 prespecified outcome of interest at Week 6 (reflecting treatment during the induction phase) and/or at 1 year (Weeks 50-54; reflecting treatment during the maintenance phase). Prespecified efficacy and safety outcomes considered in this pooled analysis included the proportions of patients achieving disease-specific clinical responses, clinical remission, or discontinuing due to lack of efficacy, and the proportions of patients experiencing adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, infections, serious infections, or discontinuing due to AEs. Data from multiple studies or study arms were extracted and pooled using a random-effect model; comparative analyses were performed separately for patients with CD and UC.
resultsWe identified three eligible CD trials and four eligible UC trials that assigned over 1200 participants per disease cohort to either IFX SC or VDZ. In patients with CD, intravenous induction therapy with IFX demonstrated better efficacy (non-overlapping 95% confidence intervals [CIs]) compared with VDZ; during the maintenance phase, IFX SC showed numerically better efficacy (overlapping 95% CIs) than VDZ. A lower proportion of IFX SC-treated patients discontinued therapy due to lack of efficacy over 1 year. In patients with UC, efficacy profiles were similar with IFX SC and VDZ during the induction and maintenance phases, and a lower proportion of IFX SC-treated patients discontinued therapy due to lack of efficacy over 1 year. In both cohorts, safety profiles for IFX SC and VDZ were generally comparable during 1 year.
conclusionIFX SC demonstrated better efficacy than VDZ in patients with CD, and similar efficacy to VDZ in patients with UC; 1-year safety was comparable with IFX SC and VDZ.
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.