ArticleIntestinal research2026
Escalation to biologics after corticosteroids in patients with newly diagnosed Crohn's disease in Japan: a claims analysis from 2010 to 2021.
Article in Intestinal research, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimsA previous health insurance claims study of Japanese patients with newly diagnosed Crohn's disease (CD) reported an increase in "step-up" approach from 2010 to 2020, with biologic use in the first year remaining stable. This study examined systemic corticosteroid (SCS) use for newly diagnosed CD in Japan and compared patients who were escalated ("step-up") and were not escalated to biologics.
methodsThis retrospective longitudinal cohort study used health insurance claims data (JMDC database). Patients diagnosed with CD from 2010 to 2020 who had no CD-related claims for ≥ 1 year before index, were traceable for ≥ 1 year after index, and treated with ≥ 1 pre-defined treatment were included. Patients classified by SCS and/or biologic use within 1 year after diagnosis were compared.
resultsOf 823 patients, 379 (46.1%) received SCS in the first year; of these, 43.5% escalated to biologics (step-up group) and 56.5% did not (SCS group). The proportion of patients receiving SCS increased from 25.8% in 2010-2011 to 55.5% in 2020; proportion escalated to biologics increased from 33.8% in 2016-2017 to 51.0% in 2020. The step-up group was significantly younger, more likely to have perianal lesions, and received more intensive treatments than the SCS group. In terms of SCS use, the step-up group was more likely to have shorter time-to-SCS initiation, and a higher initial SCS dose, than the SCS group.
conclusionsEscalation from SCS to biologics in Japanese patients with newly diagnosed CD increased between 2016 and 2020, particularly in patients with younger onset CD or perianal complications.
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.