Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 502

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 16 of the 16 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Clinical disease activity, C-reactive protein normalisation and mucosal healing in Crohn's disease in the SONIC trial

Peyrin-Biroulet, Laurent, Reinisch, Walter, Colombel, Jean-Frederic, Mantzaris, Gerassimos J, Kornbluth, Asher, Diamond, Robert, Rutgeerts, Paul, Tang, Linda K, Cornillie, Freddy J, Sandborn, William J·2014·Gut

Abstract

Background and aims: The Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) has been criticised due to heavy weighting on subjective clinical symptoms. C-reactive protein (CRP) and endoscopic lesions are objective measures of inflammation. We investigated the relationships between clinical disease activity, CRP normalisation and mucosal healing in Crohn's disease (CD). Methods: The Study of Biologic and Immunomodulator Naive Patients in CD trial compared infliximab to azathioprine and to infliximab plus azathioprine in 508 CD patients. Mucosal healing was defined as the absence of mucosal ulceration at the week 26 ileocolonoscopy in a patient who had evidence of ulceration at the baseline ileocolonoscopy. Results: 188 patients who had evaluable ileocolonoscopy with evidence of mucosal ulceration at baseline, CDAI scores and CRP values at baseline and week 26 were analysed. Seventy-two of 136 patients (53%) who had a CDAI<150 at week 26 achieved mucosal healing, and 38 of 90 patients (42%) achieved both CRP normalisation (CRP<0.8 mg/dL) and mucosal healing while in clinical remission. The positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of CDAI to detect mucosal healing using 150 as a cut-off for CDAI were 65% and 53%, respectively. The PPV and NPV of CDAI to detect mucosal healing and CRP normalisation using 150 as a cut-off for CDAI were 79% and 42%, respectively. Conclusions: Half the patients under azathioprine and/or infliximab in clinical remission have endoscopic and/or CRP evidence of residual active CD, whereas other patients with endoscopic and CRP normalisation have persistent clinical symptoms. Clinical symptoms as scored by CDAI are not a reliable measure of the underlying inflammation.

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 · 10.1136/gutjnl-2013-304984

Cites

16 of 16 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 16 references

Cited by

See all 502

Metadata

Authors
Peyrin-Biroulet, L., Reinisch, W., Colombel, J.-F., Mantzaris, G. J., Kornbluth, A., Diamond, R., Rutgeerts, P., Tang, L. K., Cornillie, F. J., & Sandborn, W. J.
Venue
Gut
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2013-08-23
Volume
63
Issue
1
Pages
88-95
ISSN
  • 0017-5749 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-3288
OpenAlex
W2026437676
Cited by
502
References
16
FWCI
27.52
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: Clinical disease activity, C-reactive protein normalisation and mucosal healing in Crohn's disease in the SONIC trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/gutjnl-2013-304984
The paper
Peyrin-Biroulet, L., Reinisch, W., Colombel, J.-F., Mantzaris, G. J., Kornbluth, A., Diamond, R., Rutgeerts, P., Tang, L. K., Cornillie, F. J., & Sandborn, W. J. (2014). Clinical disease activity, C-reactive protein normalisation and mucosal healing in Crohn's disease in the SONIC trial. Gut. https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2013-304984

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.