ArticleInflammatory bowel diseases2025
Generalizability of Randomized Controlled Trials to Routine Clinical Care in Ulcerative Colitis.
Article in Inflammatory bowel diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Filgotinib Is an Effective and Safe Treatment Option for Difficult-To-Treat Ulcerative Colitis: Real-World Evidence of the Dutch Initiative on Crohn and Colitis (ICC) Registry.United European gastroenterology journal · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHistorically, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been criticized for being poorly generalizable to patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) evaluated in routine care. We aimed to evaluate the proportion of patients with UC starting an advanced therapy who would be eligible to participate in phase 3 registrational UC RCTs.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of UC patients starting vedolizumab, ustekinumab, or tofacitinib at 2 IBD clinics at the University of Calgary. Patient charts, endoscopy reports, and laboratory results were reviewed, and compared against the inclusion and exclusion criteria from 5 RCTs (GEMINI-I, UNIFI, OCTAVE, ELEVATE, and LUCENT). The proportion of patients who would have been deemed eligible versus ineligible for trial participation at the time of starting a new advanced therapy was determined.
resultsA total of 125 patients with UC were included: 78 (62.4%) would have been eligible for at least one of the considered RCTs. Trial-eligible patients were younger, less likely to be exposed to prior immunosuppressants, and had higher C-reactive protein and fecal calprotectin. The most common reason for trial ineligibility was having inadequate disease activity at baseline (Mayo endoscopy subscore <2 or absence of rectal bleeding). A significantly greater proportion of patients would have been eligible for LUCENT (45.6%) compared to GEMINI-I (24.8%), OCTAVE (35.2%), or ELEVATE (35.2%) (P < .01 for all comparisons).
conclusionsHalf of patients with UC starting advanced therapy in routine care may be eligible for participation in phase 3 RCTs. Disease activity is the primary reason for trial exclusion.
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.