Dataset Information

Systematic review and meta-analysis: efficacy and safety of early biologic treatment in adult and paediatric patients with Crohn's disease.

ABSTRACT:

Background

There is an increasing body of evidence showing that earlier use of biologics improves clinical outcomes in Crohn's disease (CD).

Aim

To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the impact of early biologic use in the treatment of CD.

Methods

PubMed and Embase databases were searched for English language papers and conference abstracts published through April 30, 2019. Studies were selected for inclusion if patients initiated biologics within 2 years of a CD diagnosis or if earlier biologics use (top-down) was compared with a conventional step-up strategy. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted to compare clinical remission (CR), relapse and endoscopic healing rates between early biologic treatment (<2 years of disease duration or top-down treatment strategy) and late/conventional treatment (biologic use after >2 years of disease duration or conventional step-up treatment strategy).

Results

A total of 3069 records were identified, of which 47 references met the selection criteria for systematic review. A total of 18 471 patients were studied, with a median follow-up of 64 weeks (range 10-416). Meta-analysis found that early use of biologics was associated with higher rates of clinical remission (OR 2.10 [95% CI: 1.69-2.60], n = 2763, P < .00001), lower relapse rates (OR 0.31 [95% CI: 0.14-0.68], n = 596, P = .003) and higher mucosal healing rates (OR 2.37 [95% CI: 1.78-3.16], n = 994, P < .00001) compared with late/conventional management.

Conclusions

Early biologic treatment is associated with improved clinical outcomes in both adult and paediatric CD patients, not only in prospective clinical trials but also in real-world settings.

SUBMITTER: Ungaro RC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7160034 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundBiologic therapies in patients with Crohn's disease often yield low clinical and endoscopic remission rates. After multiple failed therapies, combining two biologic therapies is possibly the sole medical alternative to recurrent surgery. However, data on this approach are limited.AimsTo assess the efficacy and safety of concomitant use of two biologic therapies in the largest cohort to date of refractory Crohn's disease patients.MethodsData were extracted from Crohn's disease patients started on dual biologic therapy at two referral centres. Biologics utilised include infliximab, adalimumab, vedolizumab, ustekinumab, certolizumab and golimumab. The primary outcome was endoscopic improvement (>50% reduction in Simplified Endoscopic Score-Crohn's disease [SES-CD] or explicitly stated). Endoscopic remission (SES-CD < 3 or stated), clinical response (Crohn's disease-patient-reported outcome-2 score [PRO2] reduced by 8), clinical remission (PRO2 < 8), and C-reactive protein (CRP) were also assessed.ResultsA total of 22 patients with 24 therapeutic trials of dual biologic therapy were identified. The majority of patients had prior surgical resections (91%), stricturing (59%) or penetrating (36%) phenotype, and perianal fistulas (50%). Median number of prior failed biologics was 4. Endoscopic improvement occurred in 43% of trials and 26% achieved endoscopic remission. Fifty per cent had clinical response and 41% achieved clinical remission. There were significant post-treatment reductions in median SES-CD (14.0 [12.0-17.5] to 6.0 [2.5-8.0], P = 0.0005], PRO-2 (24.1 [20.3-27.0] to 13.4 [4.6-21.8], P = 0.002] and CRP (17.0 [11.0-24.0] to 9.0 [4.0-14.0], P = 0.02). Presence of perianal fistulas decreased from 50% to 33%. Adverse events occurred in 13% of trials.ConclusionDual biologic therapy was associated with clinical, biomarker and endoscopic improvements in selected patients with refractory Crohn's disease who failed multiple biologics. Further studies are needed to validate this approach.

Project description:BackgroundAntipsychotics are widely used in the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD), but there has been no comprehensive meta-analytic assessment that examined their use as monotherapy and adjunctive therapy.MethodsA systematic review and a meta-analysis were conducted on randomized placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) that reported on the efficacy and safety/tolerability of antipsychotics for the treatment of adults with MDD. Data of both monotherapy and adjunctive antipsychotic use were extracted, but analyzed separately using a random-effects model. Co-primary outcomes were study-defined-treatment response and intolerability-related discontinuation. We also illustrated the risk/benefit balance of antipsychotics for MDD, using two-dimensional graphs representing the primary efficacy and safety/tolerability outcome. Secondary outcomes included psychopathology, remission, all-cause-discontinuation, inefficacy-related discontinuation, and adverse events.ResultsForty-five RCTs with 12 724 patients were included in the analysis. In monotherapy (studies = 13, n = 4375), amisulpride [1.99 (1.55-2.55)], sulpiride [1.50 (1.03-2.17)], and quetiapine [1.48 (1.23-1.78)] were significantly superior to placebo regarding treatment response. However, intolerability-related discontinuations were significantly higher compared to placebo with amisulpride and quetiapine. In adjunctive therapy (studies = 32, n = 8349), ziprasidone [1.80 (1.07-3.04)], risperidone [1.59 (1.19-2.14)], aripiprazole [1.54 (1.35-1.76)], brexpiprazole [1.41 (1.21-1.66)], cariprazine [1.27 (1.07-1.52)], and quetiapine [1.23 (1.08-1.41)] were significantly superior to placebo regarding treatment response. However, of these antipsychotics that were superior to placebo, only risperidone was equivalent to placebo regarding discontinuation due to intolerability, while the other antipsychotics were inferior.ConclusionResults suggest that there are significant differences regarding the risk/benefit ratio among antipsychotics for MDD, which should inform clinical care.