Yu Jin1, Yan Lin1, Lian-Jie Lin1, Chang-Qing Zheng1. 1. Yu Jin, Yan Lin, Lian-Jie Lin, Chang-Qing Zheng, Department of Gastroenterology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang 110021, Liaoning Province, China.
Abstract
AIM: To conduct a meta-analysis examining the effectiveness and safety of vedolizumab for the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC). METHODS: A search was conducted of MEDLINE, Cochrane, EMBASE, and Google Scholar on July 31, 2013. Inclusion criteria were: (1) Randomized controlled trial (RCT); (2) Patients treated for UC; and (3) Intervention was vedolizumab. The following information/data were extracted from studies that met the inclusion criteria: the name of the first author, year of publication, study design, patient demographic information, response rate, remission rate, and adverse events. The primary outcome was clinical response rate, and the secondary outcomes were clinical remission rate and serious adverse events. Odds ratio (OR) with 95%CI were calculated for each outcome. RESULTS: Of 224 studies initially identified, three RCTs examining the use of vedolizumab meeting the inclusion criteria were included in the meta-analysis. All studies examined the use of vedolizumab at dosages ranging from 0.5 to 10 mg/kg body weight (one study used a standard dose of 300 mg). The follow-up periods were approximately 6 wk. The total number of patients in the intervention groups was 901, and in the control groups was 221. The mean age of the patients was approximately 41 years, and approximately half were males. The follow-up periods ranged from 43 d to 6 wk. The clinical response and remission rates were significantly higher for patients who received vedolizumab as compared to control patients (clinical response: OR = 2.69; 95%CI: 1.94-3.74, P < 0.001 and remission rate: OR = 2.72; 95%CI: 1.76-4.19, P < 0.001). Serious adverse events were not higher in patients that received vedolizumab. CONCLUSION: This analysis supports the use of vedolizumab for the treatment of UC.
AIM: To conduct a meta-analysis examining the effectiveness and safety of vedolizumab for the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC). METHODS: A search was conducted of MEDLINE, Cochrane, EMBASE, and Google Scholar on July 31, 2013. Inclusion criteria were: (1) Randomized controlled trial (RCT); (2) Patients treated for UC; and (3) Intervention was vedolizumab. The following information/data were extracted from studies that met the inclusion criteria: the name of the first author, year of publication, study design, patient demographic information, response rate, remission rate, and adverse events. The primary outcome was clinical response rate, and the secondary outcomes were clinical remission rate and serious adverse events. Odds ratio (OR) with 95%CI were calculated for each outcome. RESULTS: Of 224 studies initially identified, three RCTs examining the use of vedolizumab meeting the inclusion criteria were included in the meta-analysis. All studies examined the use of vedolizumab at dosages ranging from 0.5 to 10 mg/kg body weight (one study used a standard dose of 300 mg). The follow-up periods were approximately 6 wk. The total number of patients in the intervention groups was 901, and in the control groups was 221. The mean age of the patients was approximately 41 years, and approximately half were males. The follow-up periods ranged from 43 d to 6 wk. The clinical response and remission rates were significantly higher for patients who received vedolizumab as compared to control patients (clinical response: OR = 2.69; 95%CI: 1.94-3.74, P < 0.001 and remission rate: OR = 2.72; 95%CI: 1.76-4.19, P < 0.001). Serious adverse events were not higher in patients that received vedolizumab. CONCLUSION: This analysis supports the use of vedolizumab for the treatment of UC.
Authors: Brian G Feagan; Gordon R Greenberg; Gary Wild; Richard N Fedorak; Pierre Paré; John W D McDonald; Rejean Dubé; Albert Cohen; A Hillary Steinhart; Steven Landau; Rasha A Aguzzi; Irving H Fox; Margaret K Vandervoort Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-06-16 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: P E Hesterberg; D Winsor-Hines; M J Briskin; D Soler-Ferran; C Merrill; C R Mackay; W Newman; D J Ringler Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 1996-11 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Brian G Feagan; Paul Rutgeerts; Bruce E Sands; Stephen Hanauer; Jean-Frédéric Colombel; William J Sandborn; Gert Van Assche; Jeffrey Axler; Hyo-Jong Kim; Silvio Danese; Irving Fox; Catherine Milch; Serap Sankoh; Tim Wyant; Jing Xu; Asit Parikh Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2013-08-22 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Tarek A Yousry; Eugene O Major; Caroline Ryschkewitsch; Gary Fahle; Steven Fischer; Jean Hou; Blanche Curfman; Katherine Miszkiel; Nicole Mueller-Lenke; Esther Sanchez; Frederik Barkhof; Ernst-Wilhelm Radue; Hans R Jäger; David B Clifford Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2006-03-02 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Christopher Andrew Lamb; Nicholas A Kennedy; Tim Raine; Philip Anthony Hendy; Philip J Smith; Jimmy K Limdi; Bu'Hussain Hayee; Miranda C E Lomer; Gareth C Parkes; Christian Selinger; Kevin J Barrett; R Justin Davies; Cathy Bennett; Stuart Gittens; Malcolm G Dunlop; Omar Faiz; Aileen Fraser; Vikki Garrick; Paul D Johnston; Miles Parkes; Jeremy Sanderson; Helen Terry; Daniel R Gaya; Tariq H Iqbal; Stuart A Taylor; Melissa Smith; Matthew Brookes; Richard Hansen; A Barney Hawthorne Journal: Gut Date: 2019-09-27 Impact factor: 23.059