ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2025
Salivary oxidative stress persists in inflammatory bowel disease regardless of biological treatment response.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Uncontrolled oxidative stress contributes to the pathogenesis of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), yet its association with disease activity and response to biological therapy, has never been studied in saliva. We investigated whether salivary oxidative stress markers could predict therapeutic response to biologics in IBD patients. Methods: Seventy-three IBD patients (46 ulcerative colitis (UC), 27 Crohn's disease (CD)) eligible for infliximab or vedolizumab and 56 healthy controls (HC) were enrolled. Salivary advanced oxidation protein products (AOPPs), advanced glycated end-products (AGEs), and ferric reducing antioxidant power (FRAS) were measured at baseline and at week 26. Clinical response was assessed at weeks 26 and 52, and endoscopic activity at baseline and week 52. Results: Baseline AOPPs and AGEs were higher in IBD than HC (p < 0.0001), but only AOPPs distinguished mild from moderate-severe endoscopic activity (AUC 0.72; p < 0.05). Clinical response at week 26 was 77.8% in CD and 69.6% in UC, yet AOPPs remained stable from baseline. Endoscopic remission at week 52 occurred in 40.7% of CD and 23.9% of UC patients. Neither baseline nor 26-week AOPPs or AGEs predicted endoscopic improvement or remission. Conclusion: Salivary AOPPs reflect baseline disease severity but do not predict response to biologics. Persistent AOPPs accumulation despite clinical control suggests a decoupling between clinical remission and oxidative homeostasis. Understanding the drivers and clinical relevance of persistent AOPPs is needed before considering potential therapeutic applications, such as antioxidant-based adjunctive strategies or interventions targeting AOPP-mediated damage, to improve remission rates in IBD patients receiving advanced treatments.
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.