Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40065597›Full record

ArticleClinical and translational science2025

Comparative Effectiveness of Dual Biologic Therapy and Biologic Small-Molecule Therapy for Refractory Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Retrospective Single-Center Study.

Fan Yin, Xiaolei Liu, Dongdong He, Songbo Li, Xin Feng, Yongquan Shi, Min Chen

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and translational science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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

7 authors.

Fan YinState Key Laboratory of Holistic Integrative Management of Gastrointestinal Cancers and National Clinical Research Center for Digestive Diseases, Xijing Hospital of Digestive Diseases, Air Force Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.
Xiaolei LiuDepartment of Medical Insurance, Xijing Hospital, Air Force Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.
Dongdong HeState Key Laboratory of Holistic Integrative Management of Gastrointestinal Cancers and National Clinical Research Center for Digestive Diseases, Xijing Hospital of Digestive Diseases, Air Force Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.
Songbo LiState Key Laboratory of Holistic Integrative Management of Gastrointestinal Cancers and National Clinical Research Center for Digestive Diseases, Xijing Hospital of Digestive Diseases, Air Force Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.
Xin FengState Key Laboratory of Holistic Integrative Management of Gastrointestinal Cancers and National Clinical Research Center for Digestive Diseases, Xijing Hospital of Digestive Diseases, Air Force Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.
Yongquan ShiState Key Laboratory of Holistic Integrative Management of Gastrointestinal Cancers and National Clinical Research Center for Digestive Diseases, Xijing Hospital of Digestive Diseases, Air Force Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.
Min ChenState Key Laboratory of Holistic Integrative Management of Gastrointestinal Cancers and National Clinical Research Center for Digestive Diseases, Xijing Hospital of Digestive Diseases, Air Force Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.ORCID 0000-0003-3004-2634

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Patients with refractory inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) face difficulty in the treatment strategy. Combined advanced targeted therapies may obtain higher therapeutic efficacy. However, few studies compare the efficacy and safety of dual biologic therapy (DBT) with biologic small-molecule therapy (BMT) for refractory IBD. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of DBT with BMT. We retrospectively analyzed the data of patients with refractory IBD treated with DBT (n = 22) or BMT (n = 21). The primary outcome was the clinical remission rate at week 12. Secondary outcomes included the clinical response rate, endoscopic response rate, endoscopic remission rate, colectomy rate, and rate of adverse events (AEs) at week 12. At week 12, the clinical remission rates in the DBT group and BMT group were 22.7% and 28.6%, respectively. No statistically significant difference was observed between the two groups (p = 0.661). There were also no statistically significant differences between the DBT group and BMT group in the clinical response rate (68.2% vs. 71.4%, p = 0.817), endoscopic response rate (66.7% vs. 68.8%, p = 1.000), endoscopic remission rate (4.8% vs. 18.8%, p = 0.296) and colectomy rate (4.5% vs. 23.8%, p = 0.167). Two patients (9.5%) in the BMT group and no patients in the DBT group experienced AEs. However, the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.233). In conclusion, this study revealed that there may be similar effectiveness and safety of DBT and BMT for patients with refractory IBD. Further multi-center, prospective randomized controlled trials are necessary to confirm this conclusion.

Indexed as

Biological ProductsBiological TherapyInflammatory Bowel DiseasesAdultColectomyDrug Therapy, CombinationFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRemission InductionRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeYoung AdultBiological Productsbiologic small‐molecule therapydual biologic therapyeffectivenessinflammatory bowel diseaserefractory

Identifiers

PMID40065597
PMCPMC11893725

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.