Systematic review and network meta-analysis: first- and second-line biologic therapies for moderate-severe Crohn's disease

S. Singh, M. Fumery, W. J. Sandborn, Mohammad H Murad

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

14 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: There are limited data to inform positioning of agents for treating moderate-severe Crohn's disease (CD). Aim: We assessed comparative efficacy and safety of first-line (biologic-naïve) and second-line (prior exposure to anti-tumour necrosis factor [TNF]-α) agents) biologic therapy for moderate-severe CD, through a systematic review and network meta-analysis, and appraised quality of evidence (QoE) using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Methods: We identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in adults with moderate-severe CD treated with approved anti-TNF agents, anti-integrin agents and anti-IL12/23 agents, first-line or second-line, and compared with placebo or another active agent. Efficacy outcomes were induction and maintenance of clinical remission; safety outcomes were serious adverse events and infections. Network meta-analyses were performed, and ranking was assessed using surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) probabilities. Results: No head-to-head trials were identified. In biologic-naïve patients, infliximab (SUCRA,0.93) and adalimumab (SUCRA,0.75) were ranked highest for induction of clinical remission (moderate QoE). In patients with prior anti-TNF exposure, adalimumab (SUCRA, 0.91; low QoE, in patients with prior response or intolerance to anti-TNF agents) and ustekinumab (SUCRA, 0.71) were ranked highest for induction of clinical remission. In patients with response to induction therapy, adalimumab (SUCRA, 0.97) and infliximab (SUCRA, 0.68) were ranked highest for maintenance of remission. Ustekinumab had lowest risk of serious adverse events (SUCRA, 0.72) and infection (SUCRA, 0.71; along with infliximab, SUCRA, 0.83) in maintenance trials. Conclusion: Indirect comparisons suggest that infliximab or adalimumab may be preferred first-line agents, and ustekinumab a preferred second-line agent, for induction of remission in patients with moderate-severe CD. Head-to-head trials are warranted.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)394-409
Number of pages16
JournalAlimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics
Volume48
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2018

Fingerprint

Biological Therapy
Crohn Disease
Remission Induction
Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha
Maintenance
Biological Products
Safety
Interleukin-12
Infection
Integrins
Randomized Controlled Trials
Placebos
Network Meta-Analysis
Infliximab
Adalimumab
Ustekinumab

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pharmacology (medical)

Cite this

Systematic review and network meta-analysis : first- and second-line biologic therapies for moderate-severe Crohn's disease. / Singh, S.; Fumery, M.; Sandborn, W. J.; Murad, Mohammad H.

In: Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Vol. 48, No. 4, 01.08.2018, p. 394-409.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

@article{187547bc7593416f85439dfba34b15d6,
title = "Systematic review and network meta-analysis: first- and second-line biologic therapies for moderate-severe Crohn's disease",
abstract = "Background: There are limited data to inform positioning of agents for treating moderate-severe Crohn's disease (CD). Aim: We assessed comparative efficacy and safety of first-line (biologic-na{\"i}ve) and second-line (prior exposure to anti-tumour necrosis factor [TNF]-α) agents) biologic therapy for moderate-severe CD, through a systematic review and network meta-analysis, and appraised quality of evidence (QoE) using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Methods: We identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in adults with moderate-severe CD treated with approved anti-TNF agents, anti-integrin agents and anti-IL12/23 agents, first-line or second-line, and compared with placebo or another active agent. Efficacy outcomes were induction and maintenance of clinical remission; safety outcomes were serious adverse events and infections. Network meta-analyses were performed, and ranking was assessed using surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) probabilities. Results: No head-to-head trials were identified. In biologic-na{\"i}ve patients, infliximab (SUCRA,0.93) and adalimumab (SUCRA,0.75) were ranked highest for induction of clinical remission (moderate QoE). In patients with prior anti-TNF exposure, adalimumab (SUCRA, 0.91; low QoE, in patients with prior response or intolerance to anti-TNF agents) and ustekinumab (SUCRA, 0.71) were ranked highest for induction of clinical remission. In patients with response to induction therapy, adalimumab (SUCRA, 0.97) and infliximab (SUCRA, 0.68) were ranked highest for maintenance of remission. Ustekinumab had lowest risk of serious adverse events (SUCRA, 0.72) and infection (SUCRA, 0.71; along with infliximab, SUCRA, 0.83) in maintenance trials. Conclusion: Indirect comparisons suggest that infliximab or adalimumab may be preferred first-line agents, and ustekinumab a preferred second-line agent, for induction of remission in patients with moderate-severe CD. Head-to-head trials are warranted.",
author = "S. Singh and M. Fumery and Sandborn, {W. J.} and Murad, {Mohammad H}",
year = "2018",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/apt.14852",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "48",
pages = "394--409",
journal = "Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics",
issn = "0269-2813",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Systematic review and network meta-analysis

T2 - first- and second-line biologic therapies for moderate-severe Crohn's disease

AU - Singh, S.

AU - Fumery, M.

AU - Sandborn, W. J.

AU - Murad, Mohammad H

PY - 2018/8/1

Y1 - 2018/8/1

N2 - Background: There are limited data to inform positioning of agents for treating moderate-severe Crohn's disease (CD). Aim: We assessed comparative efficacy and safety of first-line (biologic-naïve) and second-line (prior exposure to anti-tumour necrosis factor [TNF]-α) agents) biologic therapy for moderate-severe CD, through a systematic review and network meta-analysis, and appraised quality of evidence (QoE) using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Methods: We identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in adults with moderate-severe CD treated with approved anti-TNF agents, anti-integrin agents and anti-IL12/23 agents, first-line or second-line, and compared with placebo or another active agent. Efficacy outcomes were induction and maintenance of clinical remission; safety outcomes were serious adverse events and infections. Network meta-analyses were performed, and ranking was assessed using surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) probabilities. Results: No head-to-head trials were identified. In biologic-naïve patients, infliximab (SUCRA,0.93) and adalimumab (SUCRA,0.75) were ranked highest for induction of clinical remission (moderate QoE). In patients with prior anti-TNF exposure, adalimumab (SUCRA, 0.91; low QoE, in patients with prior response or intolerance to anti-TNF agents) and ustekinumab (SUCRA, 0.71) were ranked highest for induction of clinical remission. In patients with response to induction therapy, adalimumab (SUCRA, 0.97) and infliximab (SUCRA, 0.68) were ranked highest for maintenance of remission. Ustekinumab had lowest risk of serious adverse events (SUCRA, 0.72) and infection (SUCRA, 0.71; along with infliximab, SUCRA, 0.83) in maintenance trials. Conclusion: Indirect comparisons suggest that infliximab or adalimumab may be preferred first-line agents, and ustekinumab a preferred second-line agent, for induction of remission in patients with moderate-severe CD. Head-to-head trials are warranted.

AB - Background: There are limited data to inform positioning of agents for treating moderate-severe Crohn's disease (CD). Aim: We assessed comparative efficacy and safety of first-line (biologic-naïve) and second-line (prior exposure to anti-tumour necrosis factor [TNF]-α) agents) biologic therapy for moderate-severe CD, through a systematic review and network meta-analysis, and appraised quality of evidence (QoE) using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Methods: We identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in adults with moderate-severe CD treated with approved anti-TNF agents, anti-integrin agents and anti-IL12/23 agents, first-line or second-line, and compared with placebo or another active agent. Efficacy outcomes were induction and maintenance of clinical remission; safety outcomes were serious adverse events and infections. Network meta-analyses were performed, and ranking was assessed using surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) probabilities. Results: No head-to-head trials were identified. In biologic-naïve patients, infliximab (SUCRA,0.93) and adalimumab (SUCRA,0.75) were ranked highest for induction of clinical remission (moderate QoE). In patients with prior anti-TNF exposure, adalimumab (SUCRA, 0.91; low QoE, in patients with prior response or intolerance to anti-TNF agents) and ustekinumab (SUCRA, 0.71) were ranked highest for induction of clinical remission. In patients with response to induction therapy, adalimumab (SUCRA, 0.97) and infliximab (SUCRA, 0.68) were ranked highest for maintenance of remission. Ustekinumab had lowest risk of serious adverse events (SUCRA, 0.72) and infection (SUCRA, 0.71; along with infliximab, SUCRA, 0.83) in maintenance trials. Conclusion: Indirect comparisons suggest that infliximab or adalimumab may be preferred first-line agents, and ustekinumab a preferred second-line agent, for induction of remission in patients with moderate-severe CD. Head-to-head trials are warranted.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85050513829&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85050513829&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/apt.14852

DO - 10.1111/apt.14852

M3 - Review article

C2 - 29920733

AN - SCOPUS:85050513829

VL - 48

SP - 394

EP - 409

JO - Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics

JF - Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics

SN - 0269-2813

IS - 4

ER -