期刊
MAYO CLINIC PROCEEDINGS
卷 89, 期 12, 页码 1621-1635出版社
ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2014.08.019
关键词
-
资金
- Center for the Science of Healthcare Delivery, Mayo Clinic
- National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences a component of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) [UL1 TR000135]
- NIH [EB001981]
Objective: To study the comparative efficacy of biologic therapy in the management of biologic-naive patients with Crohn disease (CD). Patients and Methods: We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials published from January 1, 1985, through September 30, 2013, comparing biologic agents (infliximab [IFX], adalimumab [ADA], certolizumab pegol, natalizumab, vedolizumab, and ustekinumab) with each other or placebo for inducing and maintaining clinical remission in adults with moderate to severe CD. To increase comparability across trials, we focused on a subset of biologic-naive patients for the induction end point and on responders to induction therapy for the maintenance end point. We followed a Bayesian network meta-analysis approach. Results: We identified 17 randomized controlled trials of good methodological quality comparing 6 biologic agents with placebo, with no direct comparison of biologic agents. In network meta-analysis, we observed that IFX (relative risk [RR], 6.11; 95% credible interval [CrI], 2.49-18.29) and ADA (RR, 2.98; 95% CrI, 1.12-8.18), but not certolizumab pegol (RR, 1.48; 95% CrI, 0.76-2.93), natalizumab (RR, 1.36; 95% CrI, 0.69-2.86), vedolizumab (RR, 1.40; 95% CrI, 0.63-3.28), and ustekinumab (RR, 0.61; 95% CrI, 0.15-2.49), were more likely to induce remission than placebo. Similar results were observed for maintenance of remission. Infliximab had the highest probability of being ranked as the most efficacious agent for induction (86%) and ADA for maintenance of remission (48%). Conclusion: On the basis of network meta-analysis, IFX may be most efficacious agent for inducing remission in CD in biologic-naive patients. In the absence of head-to-head treatment comparison, the confidence in these estimates is low. Future comparative efficacy studies are warranted. (C) 2014 Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research
作者
我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。
推荐
暂无数据