3.9 Article

Is Certolizumab Pegol Safe and Effective in the Treatment of Patients with Moderate to Severe Crohn's Disease? A Meta-analysis of Controlled Clinical Trials

期刊

IRANIAN RED CRESCENT MEDICAL JOURNAL
卷 15, 期 8, 页码 668-675

出版社

KOWSAR PUBL
DOI: 10.5812/ircmj.11258

关键词

Meta-analysis; Certolizumab Pegol; Crohn's Disease

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha) antibodies are currently used in patients with moderate to severe Crohn's disease (CD) who are unresponsive to conventional therapies. Certolizumab pegol (Cp) is one of the anti-TNF-alpha agents introduced for the management of CD and rheumatoid arthritis. Objectives: The aim of this meta-analysis is to assess the efficacy of Cp in inducing clinical response and remission in CD and the associated adverse events. The effect of Cp in terms of CD patients' C-reactive protein (CRP) level was also studied. Patients and Methods: Literature was searched for studies investigated the efficacy of Cp on inducing clinical response and maintaining remission in the patients with CD between 1966 and July 2012. Results: Among 165 potentially relevant studies, six with a total of 1695 patients met the inclusion criteria and were meta-analyzed. In comparison to control groups, patients who received Cp had a relative risk (RR) of 1.38 with absolute risk reduction (ARR) = 0.12; 95% CI = 0.03 to 0.21), number needed for treatment (NNT) = 9; P < 0.0001) for clinical response and RR of 1.54 (ARR = 0.09; 95% CI = -0.0198 to 0.2), (NNT = 12; P < 0.0001) for maintenance of clinical remission and non-significant RR of 1.24 (P = 0.052) for induction of clinical remission. Baseline CRP did not significantly alter the magnitude or response. Adverse events were not significantly different among patients receiving Cp comparing to placebo. Conclusions: Cp is effective for inducing clinical response and maintenance of clinical remission in patients with moderate to severe CD with similar side-effect profile as the control arms.

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。

评论

主要评分

3.9
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据