Yang HH, Huang Y, Zhou XC, Wang RN. Efficacy and safety of adalimumab in comparison to infliximab for Crohn's disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Clin Cases 2022; 10(18): 6091-6104 [PMID: 35949827 DOI: 10.12998/wjcc.v10.i18.6091]
Corresponding Author of This Article
Xu-Chun Zhou, MD, Professor, Department of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, No. 1 Youyi Road, Yuzhong District, Chongqing 400016, China. chqxchzh@163.com
Research Domain of This Article
Medicine, Research & Experimental
Article-Type of This Article
Meta-Analysis
Open-Access Policy of This Article
This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
World J Clin Cases. Jun 26, 2022; 10(18): 6091-6104 Published online Jun 26, 2022. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v10.i18.6091
Efficacy and safety of adalimumab in comparison to infliximab for Crohn's disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Hua-Hua Yang, Yi Huang, Xu-Chun Zhou, Ruo-Nan Wang
Hua-Hua Yang, Yi Huang, Xu-Chun Zhou, Department of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing 400016, China
Ruo-Nan Wang, Department of Endocrinology, Liyuan Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430077, Hubei Province, China
Author contributions: Yang HH and Zhou XC contributed to study design; Yang HH, Huang Y, and Wang RN contributed to the literature search; Yang HH, Huang Y, and Zhou XC participated in data extraction and analysis; Yang HH and Huang Y wrote the paper.
Conflict-of-interest statement: Nothing to disclosed.
PRISMA 2009 Checklist statement: The authors have read the PRISMA 2009 Checklist, and the manuscript was prepared and revised according to the PRISMA 2009 Checklist.
Open-Access: This article is an open-access article that was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: https://creativecommons.org/Licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Corresponding author: Xu-Chun Zhou, MD, Professor, Department of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, No. 1 Youyi Road, Yuzhong District, Chongqing 400016, China. chqxchzh@163.com
Received: December 29, 2021 Peer-review started: December 29, 2021 First decision: January 25, 2022 Revised: February 14, 2022 Accepted: April 30, 2022 Article in press: April 30, 2022 Published online: June 26, 2022 Processing time: 169 Days and 12.8 Hours
ARTICLE HIGHLIGHTS
Research background
Infliximab (IFX) is often selected as the first-line anti-tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) agent for Crohn’s disease (CD), despite the lack of data showing its superiority over adalimumab (ADA).
Research motivation
By comparing the effectiveness and safety between ADA and IFX, we wanted to determine if IFX or ADA is superior to the other for treatment of CD.
Research objectives
The present meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the comparative effectiveness and safety of ADA and IFX for CD to assist clinicians in making treatment choices.
Research methods
The clinical studies that compared the effectiveness or safety of ADA and IFX in the treatment of CD were searched in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases.
Research results
Our meta-analysis of CD patients who were naïve or non-naïve to anti-TNF-α agents found no significant differences between IFX and ADA on many measures of effectiveness, including clinical response, clinical remission, and secondary loss of response. Interestingly, we observed a higher rate of overall adverse events in patients using IFX compared to ADA.
Research conclusions
IFX and ADA are comparable in clinical outcomes for patients with CD who are naïve or non-naïve to anti-TNF-α antagonists. However, fewer overall adverse events are noted in ADA patients.
Research perspectives
Our study provide reassurance to clinicians by synthesizing current literature suggesting that the ADA and IFX have similar effectiveness in “real-world” use. Larger, long-term, and prospective head-to-head comparison studies will be necessary to confirm these results. More research also will be necessary to explore the cost of anti-TNF-α agents.
