Table 1.
Publication | N | Condition | Study design | Class of evidencea | Main outcomes |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Colombel J-F, 201716 | 244 | CD | Open-label phase 3 RCT | I | Endoscopic and deep remission outcomes |
Colombel J-F, 201717 | 244 | CD | Open-label phase 3 RCT | I | Adverse outcomes [hospitalisations, surgeries] |
Colombel J-F, 201336 | 778 | CD | Analysis of data from RCT and open-label extension | I | QOL [SF-36, IBDQ] |
Colombel J-F, 2018b75 | 244 | CD | Open-label phase 3 RCT | I | Clinical and endoscopic outcomes, safety |
de Jong MJ, 2017b76 | 909 | IBD | Pragmatic RCT | I | Number of outpatient visits, patient-reported quality of care, safety |
D’Haens G, 2018b78 | 122 | CD | Double-blind RCT | I | Sustained corticosteroid-free clinical remission |
Elkjaer M, 201042 | 333 | UC | RCT | I | Feasibility of ‘constant care’ approach, influence on patients’ compliance, knowledge, QOL, disease outcomes, safety and health care costs |
Hueppe A, 201441 | 514 | CD/UC | RCT | I | Health-related QOL, social participation |
Khanna R, 201522 | 1982 | CD | Open-label cluster RCT | I | Proportion of patients in corticosteroid-free remission; adverse outcomes |
Lasson A, 201534 | 91 | UC | Prospective, RCT | I | Relapse rate |
Rutgeerts PJ, 201035 | 62 | CD | Post-hoc analysis of randomised, placebo-controlled study | I | CDAI scores and clinical remission status |
Steenholdt C, 201551 | 69 | CD | RCT, single-blind, multicentre study | I | Long-term economic outcomes |
Steenholdt C, 201452 | 69 | CD | RCT, single-blind, multicentre study | I | Response rate [CDAI], accumulated treatment-related costs |
Vande Casteele N, 201550 | 263 | CD/UC | RCT | I | Clinical and biochemical remission |
Bougen G, 20149 | 67 | CD | Retrospective, chart review | II | Mucosal healing [defined as the absence of any ulcers in any segment of the gastrointestinal tract during the endoscopic procedure] |
Bougen G, 201415 | 60 | UC | Retrospective, chart review | II | Mucosal healing (defined as unremarkable findings including absence of any type of friability [even mild] and with possible remaining slight and patchy loss of vascular pattern, or erythema from inactive disease equivalent to a zero Mayo endoscopic subscore) |
Burke K, 201360 | 107 | UC | Prospective observational cohort study | II | Long-term relapse rates and healthcare costs |
Carter CT, 201161 | 638 | CD | Retrospective claims analysis | II | Adherence rates |
Carter CT, 201262 | 448 | CD | Retrospective claims analysis | II | Adherence rates, hospitalisations, length hospital stay, inpatient costs |
Chavannes M, 201646 | 188 | IBD | Single-centre retrospective cohort study | II | Serum levels of infliximab |
Click BH, 201630 | 1600 | IBD | Registry review | II | Financial health care use and disease activity |
Cook PF, 201071 | 524 | UC | Structured patient interviews | II | Impact of telephone nurse counselling on adherence |
David G, 201454 | 21076 | IBD | Analysis of data from commercial databases | II | Adherence rates |
D’Incà R, 201572 | 449 | CD/UC | Patient survey | II | Adherence, quality of life, illness intrusiveness |
Debanjali M, 200963 | 1693 | UC | Analysis of data from claims database | II | Impact of medication adherence on costs and all-cause health care use |
Feagan BG, 201464 | 945 | CD | Analysis of data from claims database | II | Health care costs by adherence status |
Hodgkins P, 201265 | 400 | UC | Discrete-choice experiment | II | Differences in patient treatment preferences based on self-reported adherence |
Kane S, 200866 | 4313 | UC | Analysis of data from claims database | II | Adherence, health care costs |
Kane SV, 200967 | 571 | CD | Analysis of data from claims database | II | Adherence, health care use, costs |
Lachaine J, 201168 | 1681 | UC | Retrospective prescription and medical claims analysis | II | Adherence, health care use, costs |
Little RD, 201618 | 52 | IBD | Retrospective observational study | II | Clinical response [biomarker and physician global assessment] |
Michels S, 201459 | 173 | CD | Analysis of data from claims database | II | Health care costs by different adherence thresholds |
Mitra D, 201258 | 1693 | UC | Retrospective analysis of insurance claims | II | Adherence, all-cause costs and health care use |
Orlaith K, 201647 | 312 | IBD | Single-centre retrospective study | II | Endoscopic remission |
Papamichail K, 201648 | 43 | UC | Single-centre retrospective study | II | Short-term mucosal healing [defined as Mayo endoscopic sub-score of ≤1, assessed at Weeks 8–14, with a baseline sub-score of ≥2] |
Paul S, 201349 | 52 | CD/UC | Prospective observational study | II | Mucosal healing [defined as faecal calprotectin <250 μg/g stools in CD and by an endoscopic Mayo score of 0 or 1 in UC] |
Poillon L, 2018b77 | 226 | CD/UC | Retrospective single-centre follow-up of 50 | II | Long-term outcome data [IBD-related hospitalisation, abdominal surgery, and systemic steroid use], continued use of infliximab, trough concentrations |
Qiu Y, 201645 | 272 | CD | Retrospective, observational cohort study | II | Mucosal healing [defined as a score of 0–2 using an endoscopic score system] |
Ramos Rivers CM, 201433 | 1925 | IBD | Prospective observational registry study | II | Patients calling out of hours |
Ray I, 201329 | 650 | CD | Single-centre, retrospective study | II | Severity of depression, pattern of outpatient service use, costs |
Regueiro M, 201637 | 308 | CD/UC | Observational study of patients enrolling in patient-centred medical home | II | QOL [SIBDQ], health care resource use [ER visits, hospitalisations] |
Regueiro M, 201638 | 108 | CD/UC | Observational study of patients enrolling in patient-centred medical home | II | IBD activity [UCAI and CD HBI], QOL [SIBDQ], depression [PHQ9] |
Sandborn W, 201520 | 804 | UC | Retrospective chart review, adalimumab vs infliximab | II | Real-world effectiveness [symptoms and disease activity] and resource use [hospitalisation and surgery rates] |
Schechter A, 201531 | 115 | UC | Chart review | II | Sustained steroid-free remission, colectomy |
Schifrien B, 201369 | 3406 | CD | Retrospective claims database analysis | II | Adherence, health care costs |
Selinger C, 201255 | 50 | UC | Face-to-face structured interview with patients | II | Preferred mode of information delivery, thresholds for adherence |
Seth N, 201432 | 542 | CD | Prospective registry study | II | Persistent abdominal pain |
Severs M, 201656 | 2612 | CD/UC | Prospective observational cohort study | II | Factors associated with non-adherence, changes in adherence and associated disease outcomes |
Severs M, 201657 | 2612 | CD/UC | Prospective observational cohort study | II | Impact of medication adherence on the disease course, health care costs and health-related QOL |
Taks M, 201743 | 33 | IBD | Single-centre evaluation of treatment algorithm | II | Remission rates, drug costs |
Van Deen WK, 201639 | 98 [plus 293 controls] | IBD | Observational control-matched study | II | IBD-specific outcomes including medication use, office visits, IBD-specific tests, ED visits, and hospitalisations |
Van Deen WK, 201640 | 98 [plus 293 controls] | IBD | Observational control-matched study | II | IBD-specific outcomes including medication use, office visits, IBD-specific tests, ED visits, and hospitalisations |
Wan GJ, 201470 | 1646 | IBD | Database analysis | II | Adherence, health care costs |
Yarur AJ, 201728 | 117 | CD | Cross sectional study | II | Fistula healing/closure, mucosal healing [defined as the absence of ulcerations ≥5 mm in the colon and terminal ileum] |
Zittan E, 201627 | 60 | CD | Chart review/patient interview | II | Clinical and endoscopic remission |
Ananthakrishnan AN, 201224 | CD | Decision analytic model comparing treatment strategies | III | Clinical response, QALYs, ICER, NNT to prevent surgery/hospitalisation | |
Ananthakrishnan AN, 201325 | CD | Decision analytic model comparing treatment strategies | III | Clinical response, QALYs, ICER, NNT to prevent surgery/hospitalisation | |
Mallow P, 201321 | UC | Cost-effectiveness modelling based on data from RCT | III | Cost per clinical response and NNT for clinical response | |
Panaccione R, 2017b79 | 244 | CD | Cost-effectiveness modelling based on data from RCT | III | Remission rates, CD-related hospitalisations, adalimumab injections, direct medical costs, QALYs, ICER, NMB |
Saini SD, 201223 | UC | Markov cohort model | III | Cost utility outcomes | |
Thwaites PA, 201644 | IBD | Economic modelling | III | Costs of intestinal ultrasound and colonoscopy to the patient and the hospital | |
Van Deen W, 201526 | 411 | CD/UC | Validation of a 4-question smartphone app to monitor IBD activity | III | Clinical disease activity indices, QOL, endoscopic score |
Van Deen W, 201474 | 642 | IBD | Developing and testing multidisciplinary care programmes for IBD patients—case scenarios | III | Clinical disease activity indices [HBI for CD and partial Mayo score for UC]; quality of life scores; health care expenditures |
Van Deen W, 201419 | 642 | IBD | Developing and testing multidisciplinary care programmes for IBD patients—case scenarios | III | Clinical disease activity indices [HBI for CD and partial Mayo score for UC]; quality of life scores; health care expenditures |
Velayos FS, 201353 | CD | Decision analytical model | III | Cost per QALY gained | |
Yen L, 201373 | UC | Budget impact model | III | Direct costs |
CD, Crohn’s disease; CDAI, Crohn’s Disease Activity Index; ED, emergency department; ER, emergency room; HBI, Harvey-Bradshaw Index; IBD, inflammatory bowel disease; IBDQ, Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire; ICER, incremental cost effectiveness ratio; NMB, net monetary benefit; NNT, number needed to treat; QALY, quality-adjusted life year; QOL, quality of life; PHQ9, Patient Health Questionnaire-9; RCT, randomised controlled trial; SF-36, Short-Form 36; SIBDQ, Short Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire; UC, ulcerative colitis; UCAI, Ulcerative Colitis Activity Index.
aClassification as follows: I, prospective RCT; II, observational/database study; III, modelling/other.
bFive publications published since the search was conducted; identified by the authors as relevant to the review topic.