Safety profile of biologic drugs in the therapy of Crohn disease: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Crohn disease (CD) is an inflammatory bowel disease which occurs especially in developed countries of Western Europe and North America. The aim of the study was to compare the safety profile of biologic drugs in patients with CD. A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL databases, until April 27, 2016. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the safety of biologic drugs (infliximab, adalimumab, vedolizumab, certolizumab pegol, and ustekinumab) with one another or with placebo in patients with CD. The network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted for an induction phase (6-10 weeks) and maintenance phase (52-56 weeks) with a Bayesian hierarchical random effects model in the ADDIS® software. The PROSPERO registration number was CRD42016032606. Ten RCTs were included in the systematic review with NMA. In the case of the induction phase, the NMA could be conducted for the assessment of the relative safety profile of adalimumab, vedolizumab, certolizumab pegol, and ustekinumab, and in the case of the maintenance phase-of infliximab, adalimumab, and vedolizumab. There were no significant differences in the rate of adverse events in patients treated with biologics. Statistical analysis revealed that vedolizumab had the greatest probability of being the safest treatment in most endpoints in the induction phase and adalimumab-in the maintenance phase. No significant differences between the biologics in the relative safety profile analysis were observed. Further studies are needed to confirm our findings, including head-to-head comparisons between the analyzed biologics.

Moćko P ，Kawalec P ，Pilc A 《-》

Safety Profile of Biologic Drugs in the Therapy of Ulcerative Colitis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

We compared the safety profile of biologic drugs in patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC). A systematic literature search was performed using Medline (PubMed), Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases through February 9, 2016. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the safety of biologic drugs (infliximab, adalimumab, golimumab, and vedolizumab) with one another or with placebo in patients with UC. Two reviewers independently conducted the search and selection of studies and rated the risk of bias in each trial. The network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted for an induction phase (6-8 weeks) and maintenance phase (52-54 weeks) with a Bayesian hierarchical random effects model in Aggregate Data Drug Information System (ADDIS) software. The PROSPERO registration number was CRD42016032607. Seven RCTs were included in the systematic review with NMA. In the case of the induction phase, the NMA could be conducted for the assessment of the relative safety profile of adalimumab, golimumab, and vedolizumab, and in the case of the maintenance phase of infliximab, adalimumab, golimumab, and vedolizumab. The methodological quality of the included RCTs was evaluated as low risk of bias, but high risk of bias in the case of attrition bias (incomplete outcome data) according to the Cochrane criteria. No significant differences were found in the rate of adverse events in patients treated with the reviewed biologics. Vedolizumab was most likely to have the most favorable safety profile in the induction phase as was infliximab for the maintenance phase. The assessment of the relative safety profile revealed no significant differences between the biologic drugs. Further studies are needed to confirm our findings including head-to-head comparisons between the analyzed biologics.

Moćko P ，Kawalec P ，Pilc A 《-》

Safety Profile of Biologic Drugs in the Treatment of Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Moćko P ，Kawalec P ，Pilc A 《-》

Comparative efficacy and safety of biologic therapies for moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Data are needed to inform the positioning of biologic therapy in the treatment of moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease, both first line and after previous biologic exposure. We aimed to assess the comparative efficacy and safety of biologics in patients with Crohn's disease. We did a systematic review and network meta-analysis of phase 2 and phase 3 randomised controlled trials done in adults (≥18 years) with moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease (Crohn's Disease Activity Index [CDAI] 220-450) treated with tumour necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists, anti-integrin, anti-interleukin (IL)-12 and IL-23p40, or anti-IL23p19 agents, either alone or in combination with immunosuppressants, as their first-line biologic or after previous biologic exposure, compared with placebo or an active comparator. The minimum duration of therapy was 14 days for trials reporting induction of remission in active disease and 22 weeks in trials reporting maintenance of remission. We searched Medline, EMBASE, the Cochrane CENTRAL Register of Controlled Trials, conference proceedings, trial registries, and unpublished data from inception to June 3, 2021, without any language restrictions. Summary estimates of the primary and secondary outcomes were extracted from the published reports; individual patient-level data were not sought. The primary endpoint was induction of clinical remission in patients with active disease (CDAI <150) and maintenance of remission in patients with response to induction therapy, with data extracted from published reports. A network meta-analysis with multivariate consistency model random-effects meta-regression was done, with rankings based on surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) values. The search strategy yielded 18 382 citations, of which 31 trials were eligible for inclusion. On the basis of 15 randomised controlled trials including 2931 biologic-naive patients, infliximab monotherapy (odds ratio [OR] 4·53 [95% CI 1·49-13·79]), infliximab combined with azathioprine (7·49 [2·04-27·49]), adalimumab (3·01 [1·25-7·27]), and ustekinumab (2·63 [1·10-6·28]) were associated with significantly higher odds of inducing remission compared to certolizumab pegol (all moderate confidence); infliximab and azathioprine combination therapy was also associated with significantly higher odds of inducing remission than vedolizumab (3·76 [1·01-14·03]; low confidence). On the basis of ten randomised controlled trials including 2479 patients with previous biologic exposure, adalimumab after loss of response to infliximab (OR 2·82 [95% CI 1·20-6·62]; low confidence), and risankizumab (2·10 [1·12-3·92]; moderate confidence), were associated with higher odds of inducing remission than vedolizumab. No differences between active interventions were observed in maintenance trials. Most trials were at low or uncertain risk of bias. Although biologic treatment choices in patients with moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease must be individualised for each patient, this analysis suggests that either infliximab with azathioprine or adalimumab might be preferred as a first-line therapy, and adalimumab (after infliximab loss of response) or risankizumab might be preferred as a second-line therapy, for induction of clinical remission. None.

Singh S ，Murad MH ，Fumery M ，Sedano R ，Jairath V ，Panaccione R ，Sandborn WJ ，Ma C ... -  《The Lancet Gastroenterology &amp; Hepatology》

Comparative efficacy of biologic therapy in biologic-naïve patients with Crohn disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

To study the comparative efficacy of biologic therapy in the management of biologic-naïve patients with Crohn disease (CD). 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-naïve 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. 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%). On the basis of network meta-analysis, IFX may be most efficacious agent for inducing remission in CD in biologic-naïve patients. In the absence of head-to-head treatment comparison, the confidence in these estimates is low. Future comparative efficacy studies are warranted.

Singh S ，Garg SK ，Pardi DS ，Wang Z ，Murad MH ，Loftus EV Jr ... -  《-》