Head-to-head trials in inflammatory bowel disease: past, present and future.
Biological Products
/ therapeutic use
Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals
Double-Blind Method
Equivalence Trials as Topic
Gastrointestinal Agents
/ therapeutic use
Humans
Immunosuppressive Agents
/ therapeutic use
Inflammatory Bowel Diseases
/ drug therapy
Meta-Analysis as Topic
Network Meta-Analysis
Observational Studies as Topic
Outcome Assessment, Health Care
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Single-Blind Method
Journal
Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology
ISSN: 1759-5053
Titre abrégé: Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101500079
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 2020
06 2020
Historique:
accepted:
18
03
2020
pubmed:
19
4
2020
medline:
21
10
2020
entrez:
19
4
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
With the increase in the number of novel drugs for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), comparing therapeutic options or strategies has become a key challenge in IBD trials. Head-to-head trials designed and powered to enable formal comparisons are the gold standard in comparative research. Indeed, these trials are requested by some health authorities for evaluating the positioning of new treatments in IBD, as well as helping prescribing physicians to select the most appropriate treatment options for their patients. Despite head-to-head trials including aminosalicylate therapy in IBD having been performed decades ago, the first results of a randomized controlled trial directly comparing biologic agents with different modes of action have only now been published, mainly owing to important methodological issues. This Perspective provides an overview of the past, current and future concepts in IBD trial design, with a detailed focus on the role of comparative research and the challenges and pitfalls in undertaking and interpreting the results from such studies.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32303700
doi: 10.1038/s41575-020-0293-9
pii: 10.1038/s41575-020-0293-9
doi:
Substances chimiques
Biological Products
0
Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals
0
Gastrointestinal Agents
0
Immunosuppressive Agents
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
365-376Commentaires et corrections
Type : ErratumIn
Références
Truelove, S. C. & Witts, L. J. Cortisone in ulcerative colitis. BMJ 2, 1041–1048 (1955).
pubmed: 13260656
doi: 10.1136/bmj.2.4947.1041
pmcid: 13260656
Peyrin-Biroulet, L. et al. Selecting therapeutic targets in inflammatory bowel disease (STRIDE): determining therapeutic goals for treat-to-target. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 110, 1324–1338 (2015).
pubmed: 26303131
doi: 10.1038/ajg.2015.233
pmcid: 26303131
Chateau, T. et al. Histological remission in ulcerative colitis. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 115, 179–189 (2020).
pubmed: 31809296
doi: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000000437
pmcid: 31809296
Sabino, J., Verstockt, B., Vermeire, S. & Ferrante, M. New biologics and small molecules in inflammatory bowel disease: an update. Therap. Adv. Gastroenterol. 12, 175628481985320 (2019).
doi: 10.1177/1756284819853208
Summers, R. W. et al. National Cooperative Crohn’s Disease Study: results of drug treatment. Gastroenterology 77, 847–869 (1979).
pubmed: 38176
doi: 10.1016/0016-5085(79)90385-8
pmcid: 38176
Courtney, M. G. et al. Randomised comparison of olsalazine and mesalazine in prevention of relapses in ulcerative colitis. Lancet 339, 1279–1281 (1992).
pubmed: 1349676
doi: 10.1016/0140-6736(92)91601-4
pmcid: 1349676
Kamm, M. A. et al. Once-daily, high-concentration MMX mesalamine in active ulcerative colitis. Gastroenterology 132, 66–75 (2007).
pubmed: 17241860
doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2006.10.011
pmcid: 17241860
Jeong, D. Y. et al. Induction and maintenance treatment of inflammatory bowel disease: a comprehensive review. Autoimmun. Rev. 18, 439–454 (2019).
pubmed: 30844556
doi: 10.1016/j.autrev.2019.03.002
pmcid: 30844556
Weinblatt, M. E. et al. Head-to-head comparison of subcutaneous abatacept versus adalimumab for rheumatoid arthritis: findings of a phase IIIb, multinational, prospective, randomized study. Arthritis Rheum. 65, 28–38 (2013).
pubmed: 23169319
pmcid: 3572583
doi: 10.1002/art.37711
Durelli, L. et al. Every-other-day interferon beta-1b versus once-weekly interferon beta-1a for multiple sclerosis: results of a 2-year prospective randomised multicentre study (INCOMIN). Lancet 359, 1453–1460 (2002).
pubmed: 11988242
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(02)08430-1
pmcid: 11988242
Gordon, K. B. et al. Efficacy and safety of risankizumab in moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis (UltIMMa-1 and UltIMMa-2): results from two double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled and ustekinumab-controlled phase 3 trials. Lancet 392, 650–661 (2018).
pubmed: 30097359
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31713-6
pmcid: 30097359
Dulai, P. S., Singh, S., Ohno-Machado, L. & Sandborn, W. J. Population health management for inflammatory bowel disease. Gastroenterology 154, 37–45 (2018).
pubmed: 29122544
doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2017.09.052
pmcid: 29122544
Ma, C. et al. Systematic review with meta-analysis: endoscopic and histologic placebo rates in induction and maintenance trials of ulcerative colitis. Aliment. Pharmacol. Ther. 47, 1578–1596 (2018).
pubmed: 29696670
doi: 10.1111/apt.14672
pmcid: 29696670
Duijvestein, M. et al. Response to placebo, measured by endoscopic evaluation of Crohn’s disease activity, in a pooled analysis of data from 5 randomized controlled induction trials. Clin. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cgh.2019.08.025 (2019).
Peyrin-Biroulet, L., Lopez, A. & Sandborn, W. Head-to-head comparative studies: challenges and opportunities? J. Crohns Colitis 11, S567–S575 (2017).
pubmed: 27660343
doi: 10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjw138
pmcid: 27660343
Sands, B. E. et al. Vedolizumab versus adalimumab for moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis. N. Engl. J. Med. 381, 1215–1226 (2019).
pubmed: 31553834
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1905725
pmcid: 31553834
Digby-Bell, J. L., Atreya, R., Monteleone, G. & Powell, N. Interrogating host immunity to predict treatment response in inflammatory bowel disease. Nat. Rev. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 17, 9–20 (2020).
pubmed: 31767987
doi: 10.1038/s41575-019-0228-5
pmcid: 31767987
Liberati, A. et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ 339, b2700 (2009).
pubmed: 19622552
pmcid: 2714672
doi: 10.1136/bmj.b2700
Gurevitch, J., Koricheva, J., Nakagawa, S. & Stewart, G. Meta-analysis and the science of research synthesis. Nature 555, 175–182 (2018).
pubmed: 29517004
doi: 10.1038/nature25753
pmcid: 29517004
Ioannidis, J. P. A. The mass production of redundant, misleading, and conflicted systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Milbank Q. 94, 485–514 (2016).
pubmed: 27620683
pmcid: 5020151
doi: 10.1111/1468-0009.12210
Rogozin´ska, E., Marlin, N., Thangaratinam, S., Khan, K. S. & Zamora, J. Meta-analysis using individual participant data from randomised trials: opportunities and limitations created by access to raw data. Evid. Based Med. 22, 157–162 (2017).
pubmed: 28818966
doi: 10.1136/ebmed-2017-110775
pmcid: 28818966
Rouse, B., Chaimani, A. & Li, T. Network meta-analysis: an introduction for clinicians. Intern. Emerg. Med. 12, 103–111 (2017).
pubmed: 27913917
doi: 10.1007/s11739-016-1583-7
pmcid: 27913917
Ghosh, S. et al. Interpreting registrational clinical trials of biological therapies in adults with inflammatory bowel diseases. Inflamm. Bowel Dis. 22, 2711–2723 (2016).
pubmed: 27585411
doi: 10.1097/MIB.0000000000000909
pmcid: 27585411
Corrigan-Curay, J., Sacks, L. & Woodcock, J. Real-world evidence and real-world data for evaluating drug safety and effectiveness. JAMA 320, 867–868 (2018).
pubmed: 30105359
doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.10136
pmcid: 30105359
Blonde, L., Khunti, K., Harris, S. B., Meizinger, C. & Skolnik, N. S. Interpretation and impact of real-world clinical data for the practicing clinician. Adv. Ther. 35, 1763–1774 (2018).
pubmed: 30357570
pmcid: 6223979
doi: 10.1007/s12325-018-0805-y
Olivera, P., Danese, S., Jay, N., Natoli, G. & Peyrin-Biroulet, L. Big data in IBD: a look into the future. Nat. Rev. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 16, 312–321 (2019).
pubmed: 30659247
doi: 10.1038/s41575-019-0102-5
pmcid: 30659247
Ha, C., Ullman, T. A., Siegel, C. A. & Kornbluth, A. Patients enrolled in randomized controlled trials do not represent the inflammatory bowel disease patient population. Clin. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 10, 1002–1007 (2012).
pubmed: 22343692
doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2012.02.004
pmcid: 22343692
Pouillon, L. et al. Mucosal healing and long-term outcomes of patients with inflammatory bowel diseases receiving clinic-based vs trough concentration-based dosing of infliximab. Clin. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 16, 1276–1283 (2018).
pubmed: 29203225
doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2017.11.046
pmcid: 29203225
Vande Casteele, N. et al. Trough concentrations of infliximab guide dosing for patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Gastroenterology 148, 1320–1329 (2015).
pubmed: 25724455
doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2015.02.031
pmcid: 25724455
D’Haens, G. et al. Increasing infliximab dose based on symptoms, biomarkers, and serum drug concentrations does not increase clinical, endoscopic, and corticosteroid-free remission in patients with active luminal Crohn’s disease. Gastroenterology 154, 1343–1351 (2018).
pubmed: 29317275
doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2018.01.004
pmcid: 29317275
Austin, P. C. An introduction to propensity score methods for reducing the effects of confounding in observational studies. Multivar. Behav. Res. 46, 399–424 (2011).
doi: 10.1080/00273171.2011.568786
Fleischmann, R., Landewé, S. & Smolen, J. Review of head-to-head study designs in rheumatoid arthritis. Semin. Arthritis Rheum. 46, 279–285 (2016).
doi: 10.1016/j.semarthrit.2016.07.006
Faleck, D. et al. Comparative effectiveness of vedolizumab and TNF-antagonist therapy in ulcerative colitis: a multicentre consortium propensity score-matched analysis [abstract OP026]. J. Crohns Colitis 12, S019 (2018).
doi: 10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjx180.025
Koliani-Pace, J. L. et al. Changes in vedolizumab utilization across US academic centers and community practice are associated with improved effectiveness and disease outcomes. Inflamm. Bowel Dis. 25, 1854–1861 (2019).
pubmed: 31050734
pmcid: 6799947
doi: 10.1093/ibd/izz071
Khanna, R. et al. Early combined immunosuppression for the management of Crohn’s disease (REACT): a cluster randomised controlled trial. Lancet 386, 1825–1834 (2015).
pubmed: 26342731
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00068-9
Armstrong, K. Methods in comparative effectiveness research. J. Clin. Oncol. 30, 4208–4214 (2012).
pubmed: 23071240
pmcid: 3504326
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2012.42.2659
Lathyris, D. N., Patsopoulos, N. A., Salanti, G. & Ioannidis, J. P. A. Industry sponsorship and selection of comparators in randomized clinical trials. Eur. J. Clin. Invest. 40, 172–182 (2010).
pubmed: 20050879
doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2362.2009.02240.x
Flacco, M. E. et al. Head-to-head randomized trials are mostly industry sponsored and almost always favor the industry sponsor. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 68, 811–820 (2015).
pubmed: 25748073
doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.12.016
pmcid: 25748073
Jørgensen, K. K. et al. Switching from originator infliximab to biosimilar CT-P13 compared with maintained treatment with originator infliximab (NOR-SWITCH): a 52-week, randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority trial. Lancet 389, 2304–2316 (2017).
pubmed: 28502609
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)30068-5
pmcid: 28502609
Olivera, P. et al. Physicians’ perspective on the clinical meaningfulness of inflammatory bowel disease trial results: an International Organization for the Study of Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IOIBD) survey. Aliment. Pharmacol. Ther. 47, 773–783 (2018).
pubmed: 29349829
doi: 10.1111/apt.14514
pmcid: 29349829
Dunn, D. T., Copas, A. J. & Brocklehurst, P. Superiority and non-inferiority: two sides of the same coin? Trials 19, 499 (2018).
pubmed: 30223881
pmcid: 6142414
doi: 10.1186/s13063-018-2885-z
Tsui, M., Rehal, S., Jairath, V. & Kahan, B. C. Most noninferiority trials were not designed to preserve active comparator treatment effects. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 110, 82–89 (2019).
pubmed: 30858020
doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.03.003
pmcid: 30858020
Wan, M. T. et al. Head-to-head trials of systemic psoriasis therapies: a systematic review of study design and maximum acceptable treatment differences. J. Eur. Acad. Dermatol. Venereol. 33, 42–55 (2019).
pubmed: 29989662
doi: 10.1111/jdv.15174
pmcid: 29989662
Sandborn, W. J. et al. Induction of clinical and colonoscopic remission of mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis with budesonide MMX 9 mg: pooled analysis of two phase 3 studies. Aliment. Pharmacol. Ther. 41, 409–418 (2015).
pubmed: 25588902
pmcid: 6681012
doi: 10.1111/apt.13076
Gross, V. et al. 3g mesalazine granules are superior to 9mg budesonide for achieving remission in active ulcerative colitis: a double-blind, double-dummy, randomised trial. J. Crohns Colitis 5, 129–138 (2011).
pubmed: 21453882
doi: 10.1016/j.crohns.2010.11.006
pmcid: 21453882
Lichtenstein, G. R. et al. Effect of once- or twice-daily MMX mesalamine (SPD476) for the induction of remission of mild to moderately active ulcerative colitis. Clin. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 5, 95–102 (2007).
pubmed: 17234558
doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2006.10.025
pmcid: 17234558
Kamm, M. A. et al. Effect of extended MMX mesalamine therapy for acute, mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis. Inflamm. Bowel Dis. 15, 1–8 (2009).
pubmed: 18671232
doi: 10.1002/ibd.20580
pmcid: 18671232
World Medical Association. WMA Declaration of Helsinki – Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects. WMA https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-helsinki-ethical-principles-for-medical-research-involving-human-subjects/ (2018)
Panaccione, R. et al. Combination therapy with infliximab and azathioprine is superior to monotherapy with either agent in ulcerative colitis. Gastroenterology 146, 392–400 (2014).
pubmed: 24512909
doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2013.10.052
pmcid: 24512909
Colombel, J. F. et al. Infliximab, azathioprine, or combination therapy for Crohn’s disease. N. Engl. J. Med. 362, 1383–1395 (2010).
pubmed: 20393175
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0904492
pmcid: 20393175
Schulz, K. F. & Grimes, D. A. Blinding in randomised trials: hiding who got what. Lancet 359, 696–700 (2002).
pubmed: 11879884
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(02)07816-9
pmcid: 11879884
Wan, M., Orlu-Gul, M., Legay, H. & Tuleu, C. Blinding in pharmacological trials: the devil is in the details. Arch. Dis. Child. 98, 656–659 (2013).
pubmed: 23898156
pmcid: 3833301
doi: 10.1136/archdischild-2013-304037
Williams, J. G. et al. Infliximab versus ciclosporin for steroid-resistant acute severe ulcerative colitis (CONSTRUCT): a mixed methods, open-label, pragmatic randomised trial. Lancet Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 1, 15–24 (2016).
pubmed: 27595142
pmcid: 4994668
doi: 10.1016/S2468-1253(16)30003-6
Yoo, D. H. et al. Efficacy and safety of CT-P13 (biosimilar infliximab) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: comparison between switching from reference infliximab to CT-P13 and continuing CT-P13 in the PLANETRA extension study. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 76, 355–363 (2017).
pubmed: 27130908
doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2015-208786
pmcid: 27130908
Park, W. et al. Efficacy and safety of switching from reference infliximab to CT-P13 compared with maintenance of CT-P13 in ankylosing spondylitis: 102-week data from the PLANETAS extension study. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 76, 346–354 (2017).
pubmed: 27117698
doi: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2015-208783
pmcid: 27117698
Colombel, J.-F. et al. Effect of tight control management on Crohn’s disease (CALM): a multicentre, randomised, controlled phase 3 trial. Lancet 390, 2779–2789 (2017).
pubmed: 29096949
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)32641-7
pmcid: 29096949
European Medicines Agency. Guideline on the Development of New Medicinal Products for the Treatment of Ulcerative Colitis. EMA https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/scientific- guideline/guideline-development-new-medicinal-products-treatment-ulcerative-colitis-revision-1_en.pdf (2018).
European Medicines Agency. Guideline on the Development of New Medicinal Products for the Treatment of Crohn’s Disease. EMA https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/scientific-guideline/guideline-development-new-medicinal-products-treatment-crohns-disease-revision-2_en.pdf (2018).
Reinisch, W. et al. Comparison of the EMA and FDA guidelines on ulcerative colitis drug development. Clin. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 17, 1673–1679.e1 (2019).
pubmed: 31352970
doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2018.10.032
pmcid: 31352970
Ma, C. et al. Heterogeneity in definitions of efficacy and safety endpoints for clinical trials of Crohn’s disease: a systematic review. Clin. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 16, 1407–1419 (2018).
pubmed: 29596987
doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2018.02.051
pmcid: 29596987
Vuitton, L. et al. Defining endoscopic response and remission in ulcerative colitis clinical trials: an international consensus. Aliment. Pharmacol. Ther. 45, 801–813 (2017).
pubmed: 28112419
doi: 10.1111/apt.13948
pmcid: 28112419
Vuitton, L. et al. IOIBD technical review on endoscopic indices for Crohn’s disease clinical trials. Gut 65, 1447–1455 (2016).
pubmed: 26353983
doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2015-309903
pmcid: 26353983
Danese, S. et al. Identification of endpoints for development of antifibrosis drugs for treatment of Crohn’s disease. Gastroenterology 155, 76–87 (2018).
pubmed: 29601825
doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2018.03.032
pmcid: 29601825
Pittet, V. E. H. et al. Differences in outcomes reported by patients with inflammatory bowel diseases vs their health care professionals. Clin. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 17, 2050–2059 (2019).
pubmed: 30471455
doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2018.11.029
pmcid: 30471455
Bryant, R. V. et al. Beyond endoscopic mucosal healing in UC: histological remission better predicts corticosteroid use and hospitalisation over 6 years of follow-up. Gut 65, 408–414 (2016).
pubmed: 25986946
doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2015-309598
pmcid: 25986946
D’Haens, G. et al. Challenges to the design, execution, and analysis of randomized controlled trials for inflammatory bowel disease. Gastroenterology 143, 1461–1469 (2012).
pubmed: 23000597
doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2012.09.031
pmcid: 23000597
Feagan, B. et al. Performance of Crohn’s disease clinical trial endpoints based upon different cutoffs for patient reported outcomes or endoscopic activity: analysis of EXTEND data. Inflamm. Bowel Dis. 24, 932–942 (2018).
pubmed: 29668919
doi: 10.1093/ibd/izx082
pmcid: 29668919
Ponsioen, C. Y. et al. Laparoscopic ileocaecal resection versus infliximab for terminal ileitis in Crohn’s disease: a randomised controlled, open-label, multicentre trial. Lancet Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2, 785–792 (2017).
pubmed: 28838644
doi: 10.1016/S2468-1253(17)30248-0
pmcid: 28838644
US National Library of Medicine. ClinicalTrials.gov https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02136069 (2020).
Vande Casteele, N., Herfarth, H., Katz, J., Falck-Ytter, Y. & Singh, S. American Gastroenterological Association Institute technical review on the role of therapeutic drug monitoring in the management of inflammatory bowel diseases. Gastroenterology 153, 835–857.e6 (2017).
pubmed: 28774547
doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2017.07.031
pmcid: 28774547
Feagan, B. G. et al. Methotrexate in combination with infliximab is no more effective than infliximab alone in patients with Crohn’s disease. Gastroenterology 146, 681–688 (2014).
pubmed: 24269926
doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2013.11.024
pmcid: 24269926
Laharie, D. et al. Ciclosporin versus infliximab in patients with severe ulcerative colitis refractory to intravenous steroids: a parallel, open-label randomised controlled trial. Lancet 380, 1909–1915 (2012).
pubmed: 23063316
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61084-8
pmcid: 23063316
Paul, S. et al. Pharmacokinetics of adalimumab in inflammatory bowel diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Inflamm. Bowel Dis. 20, 1288–1295 (2014).
pubmed: 24831559
doi: 10.1097/MIB.0000000000000037
pmcid: 24831559
Peyrin-Biroulet, L. et al. Loss of response to vedolizumab and ability of dose intensification to restore response in patients with Crohn’s disease or ulcerative colitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 17, 838–846 (2019).
pubmed: 29935327
doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2018.06.026
pmcid: 29935327
Sandborn, W. J. et al. Efficacy and safety of vedolizumab subcutaneous formulation in a randomized trial of patients with ulcerative colitis. Gastroenterology 158, 562–572.e12 (2020).
pubmed: 31470005
doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2019.08.027
pmcid: 31470005
D’Haens, G. et al. Early combined immunosuppression or conventional management in patients with newly diagnosed Crohn’s disease: an open randomised trial. Lancet 371, 660–667 (2008).
pubmed: 18295023
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(08)60304-9
pmcid: 18295023
US National Library of Medicine. ClinicalTrials.gov https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02871635 (2019).
US National Library of Medicine. ClinicalTrials.gov https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02163759 (2020).
US National Library of Medicine. ClinicalTrials.gov https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02171429 (2020).
US National Library of Medicine. ClinicalTrials.gov https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03616821 (2020).
US National Library of Medicine. ClinicalTrials.gov https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03464136 (2020).
US National Library of Medicine. ClinicalTrials.gov https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03662542 (2020).
US National Library of Medicine. ClinicalTrials.gov https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03759288 (2020).
US National Library of Medicine. ClinicalTrials.gov https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/record/NCT03926130 (2020).
US National Library of Medicine. ClinicalTrials.gov https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03466411 (2020).
Verstockt, B. et al. Low TREM1 expression in whole blood predicts anti-TNF response in inflammatory bowel disease. EBioMedicine 40, 733–742 (2019).
pubmed: 30685385
pmcid: 6413341
doi: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2019.01.027
Dulai, P. S. et al. Approaches to integrating biomarkers into clinical trials and care pathways as targets for treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases. Gastroenterology 157, 1032–1043.e1 (2019).
pubmed: 31228441
doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2019.06.018
pmcid: 31228441