首页> 外文期刊>Gastroenterology research and practice >Systematic Review with Network Meta-Analysis: Efficacy of Induction Therapy with a Second Biological Agent in Anti-TNF-Experienced Crohn’s Disease Patients
【24h】

Systematic Review with Network Meta-Analysis: Efficacy of Induction Therapy with a Second Biological Agent in Anti-TNF-Experienced Crohn’s Disease Patients

机译:通过网络荟萃分析进行系统评价:使用第二种生物制剂进行诱导治疗对经历过TNF的克罗恩病患者的疗效

获取原文
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Background and Aim. Crohn’s disease (CD) is a chronic inflammatory condition of the gastrointestinal tract with the potential to progress to a severe debilitating state. Treatment with biological agents is highly efficient, improving both short-term outcomes and long-term prognosis. Nonetheless, up to 60% of patients receiving biological therapy will exhibit nonresponse at some point. The optimal management of such patients is not clearly defined. Besides traditional anti-TNF agents (infliximab, adalimumab, and certolizumab), alternative biological therapies (natalizumab, vedolizumab, and ustekinumab) are currently available for the treatment of CD. Our aim was to analyze all available evidence regarding efficacy of a second biological in “biological-treatment-experienced“ patients. Methods. A systematic review of the literature was conducted using specific criteria for selecting relevant randomized clinical trials evaluating response to administration of secondary biological therapy in “anti-TNF-experienced“ CD patients. Data from these studies was used to perform (a) traditional meta-analysis to ascertain the effect of secondary treatment versus placebo and (b) network meta-analysis to compare indirectly the efficacy of available biological agents. Results. Out of initially 977 studies, only eight were included for analysis, providing a total of 1281 treated and 733 placebo-receiving CD patients. Treatment with a second biological was found to be superior to placebo for both induction of remission (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.7 to 3) and response (OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.5 to 2.5), with global rates of 24% and 42%, respectively (placebo rate 11% and 27%, for both). Indirect comparisons performed with network meta-analysis suggest no specific agent is clearly superior to others, with relatively better results observed for adalimumab in inducing disease remission. Conclusion. In anti-TNF-experienced CD patients, secondary biological administration may be efficient, while no specific agent seems to outperform the others. Further research is needed to identify optimal management strategies for this challenging subset of patients.
机译:背景和目标。克罗恩病(CD)是胃肠道的一种慢性炎症性疾病,有可能发展为严重的虚弱状态。用生物制剂进行治疗非常有效,可以改善短期结果和长期预后。但是,多达60%接受生物疗法的患者在某些时候会表现出无反应。这类患者的最佳治疗方法尚不清楚。除了传统的抗TNF药物(英夫利昔单抗,阿达木单抗和赛妥珠单抗)外,目前还可以使用其他生物疗法(那他珠单抗,维多珠单抗和乌斯替单抗)来治疗CD。我们的目的是分析所有有关“生物学治疗经验丰富”患者中第二种生物治疗的有效性的证据。方法。使用特定标准对文献进行系统的回顾,以选择相关的随机临床试验,评估“抗TNF经验” CD患者对二次生物治疗的反应。这些研究的数据用于进行(a)传统的荟萃分析,以确定二级治疗与安慰剂的疗效,以及(b)网络荟萃分析,间接比较现有生物制剂的疗效。结果。在最初的977项研究中,仅包括8项进行分析,总共提供了1281例接受治疗的患者和733例接受安慰剂的CD患者。发现在缓解的诱导(OR 2.2,95%CI 1.7至3)和反应(OR 1.9,95%CI 1.5至2.5)方面,第二种生物药物的治疗均优于安慰剂,总体发生率为24%和42分别为%(安慰剂比率均为11%和27%)。通过网络荟萃分析进行的间接比较表明,没有一种特异性药物明显优于其他药物,而阿达木单抗在诱导疾病缓解方面观察到相对较好的结果。结论。在有抗TNF经验的CD患者中,二次生物学给药可能是有效的,而似乎没有一种特异性药物优于其他药物。需要进一步的研究来确定针对这一具有挑战性的患者亚组的最佳治疗策略。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号