Adam S. Cheifetz, Divine Tanyingoh, Peter M. Irving, Laura E. Raffals, Shane M. Devlin, Leonard Baidoo, Patricia Kozuch, Laurent Peyrin-Biroulet, Gilaad G. Kaplan, Miles P. Sparrow, Brian Bressler, Gil Y. Melmed, Jean-Frederic Colombel, Corey A. Siegel, Jennifer Jones, Fernando Velayos, Dalhousie University [Halifax], University of Calgary, Nutrition-Génétique et Exposition aux Risques Environnementaux (NGERE), Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM)-Université de Lorraine (UL), University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pennsylvania Commonwealth System of Higher Education (PCSHE), Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Mayo Clinic [Rochester], Guy's and St Thomas' Hospitals, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, The Alfred Hospital, University of California [San Francisco] (UCSF), University of California, University of British Columbia (UBC), Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai [New York] (MSSM), and Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center
International audience; Background & AimsThere is debate over whether patients with Crohn’s disease who start anti–tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy after failed immunomodulator therapy should continue to receive concomitant immunomodulators. We conducted a meta-analysis of subgroups from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of anti-TNF agents to compare the efficacy and safety of concomitant immunomodulator therapy vs anti-TNF monotherapy.MethodsWe performed a systematic review of literature published from 1980 through 2008 and identified 11 RCTs of anti-TNF agents in patients with luminal or fistulizing Crohn’s disease. We excluded RCTs of patients who were naive to anti-TNF and immunomodulator therapy. The primary end points were clinical response at weeks 4–14 and 24–30 and remission at weeks 24–30. Secondary end points included infusion site or injection site reactions and selected adverse events. A priori subgroup analyses were performed to evaluate fistula closure and the efficacy and safety of combination therapy with different anti-TNF agents.ResultsOverall, combination therapy was no more effective than monotherapy in inducing 6-month remission (odds ratio [OR], 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80–1.31), inducing a response (OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.79–1.48), maintaining a response (OR, 1.53; 95% CI, 0.67–3.49), or inducing partial (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.84–1.88) or complete fistula closure (OR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.68–1.78). In subgroup analyses of individual anti-TNF agents, combination therapy was not more effective than monotherapy in inducing 6-month remission in those treated with infliximab (OR, 1.73; 95% CI, 0.97–3.07), adalimumab (OR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.58–1.35), or certolizumab (OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.65–1.34). Overall, combination therapy was not associated with an increase in adverse events, but inclusion of infliximab was associated with fewer injection site reactions (OR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.26–0.79.)ConclusionsOn the basis of a meta-analysis, continued use of immunomodulator therapy after starting anti-TNF therapy is no more effective than anti-TNF monotherapy in inducing or maintaining response or remission. RCTs are needed to adequately assess the efficacy of continued immunomodulator therapy after anti-TNF therapy is initiated.