SynthesisFrontiers in immunology2026
The predictive value of machine learning for the response to anti-TNF-α therapy in patients with Crohn's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the performance of machine learning (ML) in predicting the response to anti-tumor necrosis factor-α (anti-TNF-α) therapy in individuals with Crohn's disease (CD), providing an evidence-based basis for the construction or update of prediction tools. Methods: PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science were comprehensively searched for studies published up to November 18, 2025 on ML predictive models for the therapeutic response to anti-TNF treatment in individuals with CD. The Prediction model Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST) was used to assess the risk of bias in the eligible articles. Model performance was assessed using the concordance index (C-index), and a meta-analysis was conducted. Results: A total of 29 studies involving 6,697 patients with CD were included. Of these studies, 22 focused on the response to anti-TNF-α therapy, 6 on mucosal healing, and 1 on other outcomes. The meta-analysis demonstrated that for predicting the treatment response to anti-TNF-α treatment, in the validation dataset, the C-indices were 0.762 for ML models based on clinical features (CFs), 0.852 for models based on radiomic features, and 0.854 for models based on CFs combined with radiomic features. In internal validation, the C-indices for models based on CFs, radiomics, and CFs combined with radiomics were 0.773 (95% CI: 0.711-0.841), 0.840 (95% CI: 0.781-0.904), and 0.830 (95% CI: 0.780-0.883), respectively. In the external validation set, models based on radiomics (0.865, 95% CI: 0.783-0.955) and models based on CFs combined with radiomics (0.883, 95% CI: 0.816-0.955) outperformed models based on CFs (0.733, 95% CI: 0.645-0.833). Furthermore, the C-index of models based on endoscopic mucosal response was 0.794. Conclusions: hile ML shows promise in predicting the therapeutic effects of anti-TNF-α treatment in individuals with CD, there are some methodological limitations. Future research should integrate multi-center, geographically diverse datasets to enhance the generalizability of models. Improving model robustness will help identify non-responders early, ultimately promoting the development of personalized therapeutic strategies and precision medicine. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD420251276470.
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.