Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 309

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Systematic review: predicting and optimising response to anti‐TNF therapy in Crohn's disease – algorithm for practical management

Ding, N. S., Hart, A., De Cruz, P.·2016·Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics

Abstract

Summary: Background: Nonresponse and loss of response to anti‐TNF therapies in Crohn's disease represent significant clinical problems for which clear management guidelines are lacking. Aim: To review the incidence, mechanisms and predictors of primary nonresponse and secondary loss of response to formulate practical clinical algorithms to guide management. Methods: Through a systematic literature review, 503 articles were identified which fit the inclusion criteria. Results: Primary nonresponse to anti‐TNF treatment affects 13–40% of patients. Secondary loss of response to anti‐TNF occurs in 23–46% of patients when determined according to dose intensification, and 5–13% of patients when gauged by drug discontinuation rates. Recent evidence suggests that the mechanisms underlying primary nonresponse and secondary loss of response are multifactorial and include disease characteristics (phenotype, location, severity); drug (pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic or immunogenicity) and treatment strategy (dosing regimen) related factors. Clinical algorithms that employ therapeutic drug monitoring (using anti‐TNF tough levels and anti‐drug antibody levels) may be used to determine the underlying cause of primary nonresponse and secondary loss of response respectively and guide clinicians as to which patients are most likely to respond to anti‐TNF therapy and help optimise drug therapy for those who are losing response to anti‐TNF therapy. Conclusions: Nonresponse or loss of response to anti‐TNF occurs commonly in Crohn's disease. Clinical algorithms utilising therapeutic drug monitoring may establish the mechanisms for treatment failure and help guide the subsequent therapeutic approach.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/apt.13445

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 309

Metadata

Authors
Ding, N. S., Hart, A., & De Cruz, P.
Venue
Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-10-30
Volume
43
Issue
1
Pages
30-51
ISSN
  • 0269-2813 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2036
OpenAlex
W1940760407
Cited by
309
References
1
FWCI
3.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Systematic review: predicting and optimising response to anti‐TNF therapy in Crohn's disease – algorithm for practical management. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/apt.13445
The paper
Ding, N. S., Hart, A., & De Cruz, P. (2016). Systematic review: predicting and optimising response to anti‐TNF therapy in Crohn's disease – algorithm for practical management. Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics. https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.13445

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.