SynthesisBMC gastroenterology2025
Infliximab for patients with moderate to severely active ulcerative colitis: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in BMC gastroenterology, 2025. 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.
- The dual balance of the cytokine network: key messengers of immune activation and triggers of cytokine storm.Biomarker research · 2026Review
- IBD and Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases: What Is the Optimal Management?Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Drug-Induced Autoimmune Hepatitis by Varenicline and Infliximab as a Continuous Disease Spectrum with Two Different Flares: Acute Liver Injury Followed by Hepatic Autoimmunity.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsUlcerative colitis (UC) is a serious inflammatory bowel disease with significant morbidity and mortality. Infliximab (IFX), a TNF-alpha antagonist, is recommended by the American Gastroenterological Association, but its clinical effectiveness and safety are based on limited studies. This meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluates the efficacy and safety of IFX in moderate-to-severe active UC, providing evidence for its clinical application.
methodsA systematic search of major English (PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library) and Chinese databases (CNKI, SinoMed, Wanfang, VIP) was conducted up to September 25, 2023, to identify RCTs comparing IFX against placebo, aminosalicylates, corticosteroids, or immunosuppressants for moderate-to-severe UC. Pooled analyses assessed short- and long-term clinical response, clinical remission, endoscopic remission (mucosal healing), safety outcomes, and corresponding 95% confidence intervals. Subgroup analyses, heterogeneity assessment, sensitivity analyses, publication bias evaluation (funnel plots), and meta-regression were performed.
resultsTwenty RCTs involving 2,350 patients (IFX: n = 1,300; controls: n = 1,050) were included. IFX demonstrated significant superior efficacy versus controls across all primary endpoints: short-term (RR = 1.38, P < 0.001) and long-term clinical response (RR = 1.52, P = 0.007); short-term (RR = 1.38, P < 0.001) and long-term clinical remission (RR = 1.52, P = 0.022); short-term (RR = 1.58, P = 0.001) and long-term endoscopic remission (RR = 1.39, P = 0.010). Adverse event rates did not differ significant between groups (RR = 1.00, P = 0.933). Meta-regression suggested geographical region as a potential source of heterogeneity for short-term clinical response.
conclusionsIFX has a more positive effect on active UC than placebos, aminosalicylic acid preparations, steroids, or immunosuppressive drugs, but shows no superiority in terms of adverse responses.
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.