Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38712360›Full record

ArticleIntestinal research2024

Defining management strategies for acute severe ulcerative colitis using predictive models: a simulation-modeling study.

Danny Con, Peter De Cruz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Intestinal research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. 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

2 authors.

Danny ConDepartment of Gastroenterology, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Australia.
Peter De CruzDepartment of Gastroenterology, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

aimsRobust management algorithms are required to reduce the residual risk of colectomy in acute severe ulcerative colitis (ASUC) refractory to standard infliximab salvage therapy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance and benefits of alternative ASUC management strategies using simulated prediction models of varying accuracy.

methodsThis was a simulation-based modeling study using a hypothetical cohort of 5,000 steroid-refractory ASUC patients receiving standard infliximab induction. Simulated predictive models were used to risk-stratify patients and escalate treatment in patients at high risk of failing standard infliximab induction. The main outcome of interest was colectomy by 3 months.

resultsThe 3-month colectomy rate in the base scenario where all 5,000 patients received standard infliximab induction was 23%. The best-performing management strategy assigned high-risk patients to sequential Janus kinase inhibitor inhibition and mediumrisk patients to accelerated infliximab induction. Using a 90% area under the curve (AUC) prediction model and optimistic treatment efficacy assumptions, this strategy reduced the 3-month colectomy rate to 8% (65% residual risk reduction). Using an 80% AUC prediction model with only modest treatment efficacy assumptions, the 3-month colectomy rate was reduced to 15% (35% residual risk reduction). Overall management strategy efficacy was highly dependent on predictive model accuracy and underlying treatment efficacy assumptions.

conclusionsThis is the first study to simulate predictive model-based management strategies in steroid-refractory ASUC and evaluate their effect on short-term colectomy rates. Future studies on predictive model development should incorporate simulation studies to better understand their expected benefit.

Indexed as

ColectomyInflammatory bowel diseasesInfliximabTumor necrosis factor-alpha

Identifiers

PMID38712360
PMCPMC11534451

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.