Abstract:Infliximab is a monoclonal antibody that binds and neutralises tumour necrosis factor‐alpha (TNF‐α) which is present in high levels in the blood serum, mucosa and stool of patients with Crohn's disease. To determine the efficacy and safety of infliximab for maintaining remission in patients with Crohn's disease. On 31 August, 2021 and 23 June, 2023, we searched CENTRAL, Embase, MEDLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov, and WHO ICTRP. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which infliximab was compared to placebo or another active comparator for maintenance, remission, or response in patients with Crohn's disease. Pairs of review authors independently selected studies and conducted data extraction and risk of bias assessment. We expressed outcomes as risk ratios and mean differences with 95% confidence intervals. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. Our primary outcome was clinical relapse. Secondary outcomes were loss of clinical response, endoscopic relapse, and withdrawal due to serious and adverse events. Nine RCTs with 1257 participants were included. They were conducted between 1999 and 2022; seven RCTs included biologically‐naive patients, and the remaining two included a mix of naive/not naive patients. Three studies included patients in clinical remission, five included patients with a mix of activity scores, and one study included biologic responders with active disease at baseline. All studies allowed some form of concomitant medication during their duration. One study exclusively included patients with fistulating disease. The age of the participants ranged from 18 to 69 years old. All but one single‐centre RCT were multicentre RCTs. Four studies were funded by pharmaceutical companies, two had a mix of commercial and public funding, and two had public funding. Infliximab is probably superior to placebo in preventing clinical relapse in patients who have mixed levels of clinical disease activity at baseline, and are not naive to biologics (56% vs 75%, RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.84, NNTB = 5, moderate‐certainty evidence). We cannot draw any conclusions on loss of clinical response (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.96), withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.19), or serious adverse events (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.00) because the evidence is very low certainty. Infliximab combined with purine analogues is probably superior to purine analogues for clinical relapse (12% vs 59%, RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.42, NNTB = 2, moderate‐certainty evidence), for patients in remission, and who are not naive to biologics. We cannot draw any conclusions on withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.49), and serious adverse events (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.54 to 2.64) because the evidence is very low certainty. We cannot draw any conclusions about the effects of infliximab on serious adverse events compared to purine analogues (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.68) for a population in remission at baseline because the evidence is very low certainty. There was no evidence available for the outcomes of clinical relapse, loss of clinical response, and withdrawal due to adverse events. Infliximab may be equivalent to biosimilar for clinical relapse (47% vs 40% RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.69), and it may be slightly less effective in averting loss of clinical response (49% vs 32%, RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.23, low‐certainty evidence), for a population with mixed/low disease activity at baseline. Infliximab may be less effective than biosimilar in averting withdrawals due to adverse events (27% vs 0%, RR 20.73, 95% CI 2.86 to 150.33, low‐certainty evidence). Infliximab may be equivalent to biosimilar for serious adverse events (10% vs 10%, RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.39 to 2.50, low‐certainty evidence). We cannot draw any conclusions on the effects of subcutaneous biosimilar compared with intravenous biosimilar on clinical relapse (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.57), loss of clinical response (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.25), and withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.97) for an active disease population with clinical response at baseline because the evidence is of very low certainty. We cannot draw any conclusions on the effects of infliximab compared to adalimumab on loss of clinical response (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.59), withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 0.10, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.72), serious adverse events (RR 0.09, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.54) for an active disease population with clinical response at baseline because the evidence is of very low certainty. There was no evidence available for the outcome of clinical relapse. Infliximab is probably more effective in preventing clinical relapse than placebo (moderate‐certainty evidence). Infliximab in combination with purine analogues is probably more effective in preventing clinical and endoscopic relapse than purine analogues alone (moderate‐certainty evidence). No conclusions can be -Abstract Truncated-

Randomised clinical trial: First‐line infliximab biosimilar is cost‐effective compared to conventional treatment in paediatric Crohn's disease

Efficacy of Infliximab Biosimilar for Maintenance Therapy in Pediatric Inflammatory Bowel Disease Following Infliximab Originator

Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Subcutaneous Infliximab for Inflammatory Bowel Diseases in Sequential Biologic Treatment

Efficacy of infliximab after loss of response of/intolerance to adalimumab in pediatric Crohn's disease: A retrospective multicenter cohort study of the "GETAID pédiatrique"

Durability of Adalimumab and Infliximab in Children With Crohn’s Disease: A Nationwide Comparison From the epi-IIRN Cohort

Editorial: Infliximab induction therapy in pediatric Crohn's disease—A cost‐effective strategy?

Clinical outcomes and cost savings of a nonmedical switch to a biosimilar in children/young adults with inflammatory bowel disease

Efficacy of Infliximab in Treatment of Pediatric Crohn's Disease in China

Precise infliximab exposure and pharmacodynamic control to achieve deep remission in paediatric Crohns disease (REMODEL-CD): study protocol for a multicentre, open-label, pragmatic clinical trial in the USA

Comparison of endoscopic healing and durability between infliximab originator and CT-P13 in pediatric patients with inflammatory bowel disease

Cost-effectiveness and budget impact analysis of infliximab and its biosimilar in patients with refractory moderate-to-severe Crohn’s disease using real world evidence in Thailand

Outcomes of the use of infliximab biosimilars in rheumatology and gastroenterology clinics

Evaluation of persistence, retention "rate" and prescription pattern of original infliximab and infliximab CT-P13 in biologic-naïve patients with ulcerative colitis

COMPARABLE CLINICAL OUTCOMES IN PEDIATRIC PATIENTS WITH CROHN’S DISEASE TREATED WITH ACCELERATED VS. STANDARD INFLIXIMAB DOSING DURING INDUCTION

Infliximab Pricing in International Economic Evaluations in Inflammatory Bowel Disease to Inform Biologic and Biosimilar Access Policies: A Systematic Review

P506. Predictors of Health-related Quality of Life in Asian Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Psychological, Clinical and Demographic Factors

Infliximab for maintenance of medically-induced remission in Crohn's disease

Comparative Effectiveness of Anti-TNF in Combination With Low-Dose Methotrexate vs Anti-TNF Monotherapy in Pediatric Crohn's Disease: A Pragmatic Randomized Trial

Impact on direct and indirect costs of switching patients with inflammatory bowel disease from intravenous to subcutaneous infliximab (CT-P13)

Comparison Of iNfliximab and ciclosporin in STeroid Resistant Ulcerative Colitis: pragmatic randomised Trial and economic evaluation (CONSTRUCT)

Effectiveness of Switching from Reference Product Infliximab to Infliximab-Dyyb in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease in an Integrated Healthcare System in the United States: A Retrospective, Propensity Score-Matched, Non-Inferiority Cohort Study