U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

Archer R, Tappenden P, Ren S, et al. Infliximab, adalimumab and golimumab for treating moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis after the failure of conventional therapy (including a review of TA140 and TA262): clinical effectiveness systematic review and economic model. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; 2016 May. (Health Technology Assessment, No. 20.39.)

Cover of Infliximab, adalimumab and golimumab for treating moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis after the failure of conventional therapy (including a review of TA140 and TA262): clinical effectiveness systematic review and economic model

Infliximab, adalimumab and golimumab for treating moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis after the failure of conventional therapy (including a review of TA140 and TA262): clinical effectiveness systematic review and economic model.

Show details

Appendix 8Network meta-analysis figures

Results when using conventional reference prior for the between study standard deviation

FIGURE 93. Base case: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the induction phase [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 93

Base case: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the induction phase [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 94. Base case: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the maintenance phase at 8–32 weeks for patients starting in response [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 94

Base case: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the maintenance phase at 8–32 weeks for patients starting in response [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 95. Base case: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the maintenance phase at 8–32 weeks for patients starting in remission [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 95

Base case: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the maintenance phase at 8–32 weeks for patients starting in remission [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 96. Base case: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the maintenance phase at 32–52 weeks for patients starting in response [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 96

Base case: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the maintenance phase at 32–52 weeks for patients starting in response [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 97. Base case: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the maintenance phase at 32–52 weeks for patients starting in remission [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 97

Base case: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the maintenance phase at 32–52 weeks for patients starting in remission [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 98. Sensitivity analysis 1: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the induction phase [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 98

Sensitivity analysis 1: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the induction phase [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 99. Sensitivity analysis 1: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the maintenance phase at 8–32 weeks for patients starting in response [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 99

Sensitivity analysis 1: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the maintenance phase at 8–32 weeks for patients starting in response [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 100. Sensitivity analysis 1: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the maintenance phase at 8–32 weeks for patients starting in remission [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 100

Sensitivity analysis 1: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the maintenance phase at 8–32 weeks for patients starting in remission [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 101. Sensitivity analysis 1: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the maintenance phase at 32–52 weeks for patients starting in response [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 101

Sensitivity analysis 1: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the maintenance phase at 32–52 weeks for patients starting in response [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 102. Sensitivity analysis 1: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the maintenance phase at 32–52 weeks for patients starting in remission [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 102

Sensitivity analysis 1: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the maintenance phase at 32–52 weeks for patients starting in remission [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 103. Sensitivity analysis 2: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the induction phase [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 103

Sensitivity analysis 2: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the induction phase [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 104. Sensitivity analysis 2: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the maintenance phase at 8–32 weeks for patients starting in response [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 104

Sensitivity analysis 2: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the maintenance phase at 8–32 weeks for patients starting in response [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 105. Sensitivity analysis 2: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the maintenance phase at 8–32 weeks for patients starting in remission [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 105

Sensitivity analysis 2: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the maintenance phase at 8–32 weeks for patients starting in remission [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 106. Sensitivity analysis 2: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the maintenance phase at 32–52 weeks for patients starting in response [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 106

Sensitivity analysis 2: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the maintenance phase at 32–52 weeks for patients starting in response [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 107. Sensitivity analysis 2: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the maintenance phase at 32–52 weeks for patients starting in remission [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 107

Sensitivity analysis 2: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the maintenance phase at 32–52 weeks for patients starting in remission [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 108. Sensitivity analysis 3: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the induction phase [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 108

Sensitivity analysis 3: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the induction phase [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 109. Sensitivity analysis 3: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the maintenance phase at 8–32 weeks for patients starting in response [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 109

Sensitivity analysis 3: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the maintenance phase at 8–32 weeks for patients starting in response [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 110. Sensitivity analysis 3: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the maintenance phase at 8–32 weeks for patients starting in remission [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 110

Sensitivity analysis 3: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the maintenance phase at 8–32 weeks for patients starting in remission [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 111. Sensitivity analysis 3: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the maintenance phase at 32–52 weeks for patients starting in response [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 111

Sensitivity analysis 3: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the maintenance phase at 32–52 weeks for patients starting in response [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 112. Sensitivity analysis 3: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the maintenance phase at 32–52 weeks for patients starting in remission [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

FIGURE 112

Sensitivity analysis 3: comparative effect of anti-TNF-α treatment on clinical response/remission in the maintenance phase at 32–52 weeks for patients starting in remission [SD ∼ U(0,2)].

Copyright © Queen’s Printer and Controller of HMSO 2016. This work was produced by Archer et al. under the terms of a commissioning contract issued by the Secretary of State for Health. This issue may be freely reproduced for the purposes of private research and study and extracts (or indeed, the full report) may be included in professional journals provided that suitable acknowledgement is made and the reproduction is not associated with any form of advertising. Applications for commercial reproduction should be addressed to: NIHR Journals Library, National Institute for Health Research, Evaluation, Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre, Alpha House, University of Southampton Science Park, Southampton SO16 7NS, UK.

Included under terms of UK Non-commercial Government License.

Bookshelf ID: NBK362463
Contents

Views

  • PubReader
  • Print View
  • Cite this Page
  • PDF version of this title (7.4M)

Other titles in this collection

Recent Activity

ClearTurn OffTurn On

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...