Skip to main content
. 2020 Apr 16;2020(4):CD012005. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012005.pub2

1. Adalimumab 40 mg every other week compared to placebo for fatigue in inflammatory bowel disease.

Adalimumab 40 mg every other week compared to placebo for fatigue in inflammatory bowel disease
Patient or population: participants with moderately‐to‐severely active disease
 Setting: 92 centres in the United States, Europe, Canada, Australia and South Africa
 Intervention: adalimumab 40 mg every other week
 Comparison: placebo
Outcomes Anticipated absolute effects* (95% CI) Relative effect
 (95% CI) № of participants
 (studies) Certainty of the evidence
 (GRADE) Comments
Risk with placebo Risk with adalimumab 40 mg every other week
Fatigue
 assessed with: FACIT‐Fatigue
 follow‐up: 56 weeks The mean fatigue score was 32.5 MD 4.3 higher
 (1.75 higher to 6.85 higher) 337
 (1 RCT) ⊕⊕⊝⊝
 LOW 1 FACIT‐F scores ranged from 0 to 52, with higher scores indicating less fatigue.
Fatigue
 assessed with: SF‐36 Vitality
 follow‐up: 56 weeks The mean fatigue score was 54.8 MD 2.8 higher
 (5.1 lower to 10.7 higher) 143
 (1 RCT) ⊕⊕⊝⊝
 LOW 2 SF‐36 vitality subscale scores ranged from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating greater vitality (less fatigue).
Quality of life
 assessed with: IBDQ
 follow‐up: 56 weeks The mean quality of life score was 172.9 MD 10.4 higher
 (0.53 lower to 21.33 higher) 145
 (1 RCT) ⊕⊕⊝⊝
 LOW 2 IBDQ scores ranged from 32 to 224, with higher scores indicating better quality of life.
Adverse events
 assessed with: MedDRA
 follow‐up: 56 weeks 847 per 1,000 888 per 1,000
 (826 to 930) OR 1.44
 (0.86 to 2.41) 521
 (1 RCT) ⊕⊕⊕⊝
 MODERATE 3  
Serious adverse events
 assessed with: MedDRA
 follow‐up: 56 weeks 153 per 1,000 92 per 1,000
 (56 to 148) OR 0.56
 (0.33 to 0.96) 521
 (1 RCT) ⊕⊕⊕⊝
 MODERATE 3  
Withdrawal due to adverse events
 assessed with: MedDRA
 follow‐up: 56 weeks 134 per 1,000 69 per 1,000
 (39 to 119) OR 0.48
 (0.26 to 0.87) 521
 (1 RCT) ⊕⊕⊕⊝
 MODERATE 3  
*The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).
 
 CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio; OR: Odds ratio;
GRADE Working Group grades of evidenceHigh certainty: We are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect
 Moderate certainty: We are moderately confident in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different
 Low certainty: Our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: The true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect
 Very low certainty: We have very little confidence in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect

1 Downgraded two levels due to very serious imprecision as the confidence interval was wide and the fatigue data represented the last‐observation‐carried‐forward when a participant had missing value, dropped out or switched to open‐label therapy.

2 Downgraded two levels due to serious imprecision as the number of participants was small and confidence interval was wide.

3 Downgraded one level due to serious imprecision as the number of participants was small.