ArticleFrontiers in immunology2026
A single-center clinical study on the combination of Five-flavor sophora flavescens enteric-coated capsules and vedolizumab in induction therapy for ulcerative colitis.
Article in Frontiers in immunology, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Vedolizumab (VDZ) combined with Five-flavor sophora flavescens enteric-coated capsules (FSEC) for induction therapy in Ulcerative colitis (UC). Methods: UC patients treated with FSEC and/or VDZ were enrolled and divided into combination group (VDZ+FSEC) and single drug group (VDZ). The primary end points were clinical and endoscopic response and remission rates at week 14 and week 52. Secondary end points were the 14-week corticosteroid withdrawal rate, the number of bowel movements, the number of bloody stools, improvement in inflammatory markers, and safety. Results: The clinical response rate (97.4% vs. 79.1%, P = 0.011, 95% confidence interval(CI) 4.1%, 32.8%) and endoscopic response rate (74.4% vs. 51.2%, P = 0.031, 95%CI 2.2%, 41.4%) at week 14 in the combination group were significantly higher than those in the single-agent group. PP analysis showed that the endoscopic response rate at week 52 in the combination group was significantly better than that in the monotherapy group (85.7% vs. 62.5%, P = 0.042, 95%CI 2.0%, 44.4%), but there was no significant difference in ITT analysis. At week 14, the number of bowel movements and hematochezia scores were significantly improved in the combination group and the monotherapy group, and the improvement in the combination group was more significant at early stage and multiple time points. There were no serious adverse reactions in the two groups. Conclusion: FSEC combined with VDZ demonstrated superior clinical response rates and endoscopic response rates, and had greater advantages in early improvement of hematochezia and defecation frequency, compared to VDZ monotherapy, with a favorable safety profile.
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.