Original Article
Sargramostim for Active Crohn's Disease
N Engl J Med 2005; 352:2193-2201May 26, 2005
- Abstract
Background
Sargramostim, granulocyte–macrophage colony-stimulating factor, a hematopoietic growth factor, stimulates cells of the intestinal innate immune system. Preliminary studies suggest sargramostim may have activity in Crohn's disease. To evaluate this novel therapeutic approach, we conducted a randomized, placebo-controlled trial.
Methods
Using a 2:1 ratio, we randomly assigned 124 patients with moderate-to-severe active Crohn's disease to receive 6 μg of sargramostim per kilogram per day or placebo subcutaneously for 56 days. Antibiotics and aminosalicylates were allowed; immunosuppressants and glucocorticoids were prohibited. The primary end point was a clinical response, defined by a decrease from baseline of at least 70 points in the Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) at the end of treatment (day 57). Other end points included changes in disease severity and the health-related quality of life and adverse events.
Results
There was no significant difference in the rate of the primary end point of a clinical response defined by a decrease of at least 70 points in the CDAI score on day 57 between the sargramostim and placebo groups (54 percent vs. 44 percent, P=0.28). However, significantly more patients in the sargramostim group than in the placebo group reached the secondary end points of a clinical response defined by a decrease from baseline of at least 100 points in the CDAI score on day 57 (48 percent vs. 26 percent, P=0.01) and of remission, defined by a CDAI score of 150 points or less on day 57 (40 percent vs. 19 percent, P=0.01). The rates of either type of clinical response and of remission were significantly higher in the sargramostim group than in the placebo group on day 29 of treatment and 30 days after treatment. The sargramostim group also had significant improvements in the quality of life. Mild-to-moderate injection-site reactions and bone pain were more common in the sargramostim group, and three patients in this group had serious adverse events possibly or probably related to treatment.
Conclusions
This study was negative for the primary end point, but findings for the secondary end points suggest that sargramostim therapy decreased disease severity and improved the quality of life in patients with active Crohn's disease.
Media in This Article
Figure 1
Percentage of Patients Who Had a Clinical Response, as Defined by a Decrease from Baseline of at Least 70 or at Least 100 Points in the CDAI Score, or Remission through 30 Days of Follow-up.Figure 2
Median CDAI Scores over Time.Article Activity
- Article
Crohn's disease is a chronic inflammatory disorder occurring throughout the gastrointestinal tract. Current treatment emphasizes the use of immunosuppressive agents. However, evolving understanding of the pathophysiology of Crohn's disease has indicated that alternative approaches, which avoid immunosuppression, may be useful. Specifically, Crohn's disease may result from defective functioning of intestinal innate immune defense, comprising intestinal epithelium and phagocytic cells of the lamina propria, including neutrophils and macrophages. Breakdown of this defensive barrier may permit persistent exposure of lamina propria cells to luminal microbes and microbial products, resulting in an aberrant, chronic inflammatory process mediated by T cells.1-3 Thus, treatment directed at augmenting the intestinal innate immune defense rather than suppressing a secondary inflammatory response may be effective in Crohn's disease.
Granulocyte–macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF), a myeloid growth factor, plays a pivotal role in the development and function of phagocytic cells. GM-CSF is also expressed by CD4+ T cells and Paneth cells of the intestinal epithelium. Furthermore, both myeloid and intestinal epithelial cells throughout the gastrointestinal tract express GM-CSF receptors.4,5 These findings suggest that GM-CSF may help maintain the function of the intestinal innate immune barrier and that exogenous GM-CSF may augment host defense and ameliorate inflammation associated with Crohn's disease.
Sargramostim (Leukine, Berlex) is a yeast-derived recombinant human GM-CSF, most commonly used for myeloid-cell recovery after chemotherapy. A pilot study of sargramostim without concomitant immunosuppressive therapy in 15 patients with moderate-to-severe active Crohn's disease demonstrated a high rate of clinical response and remission with limited adverse effects.6 We report the results of a randomized, placebo-controlled trial conducted to evaluate this unique approach in patients with moderate-to-severe active Crohn's disease.
Methods
Patients
Eligible patients were at least 18 years old with a confirmed diagnosis of moderate-to-severe active Crohn's disease, as defined by a score of 220 to 475 on the Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) (scores can range from 0 to 600, with higher scores indicating more severe disease). Patients who had been taking stable doses of antibiotics or aminosalicylates for at least four weeks were eligible. Patients who had been taking azathioprine, mercaptopurine, methotrexate, or oral or rectal glucocorticoids within 4 weeks before the study began were not eligible, nor were those who had been receiving anti–tumor necrosis factor therapy within 12 weeks before the study began. Prior use of sargramostim or filgrastim was prohibited. Patients were excluded if they were pregnant or breast-feeding or had other serious medical conditions, an ostomy, symptoms of bowel obstruction or stricture, or detectable fecal ova, parasites, pathogenic bacteria, or Clostridium difficile toxin.
Study Design
Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive sargramostim (6 μg per kilogram of body weight) or placebo subcutaneously daily for 56 days. The randomization (computer-generated by Almedica International) was stratified according to whether the patient had received prior second-line therapy for Crohn's disease. Permuted blocks of fixed size were generated for each stratum. Patients were required to complete all eligibility checks (checks of eligibility according to inclusion and exclusion criteria) before undergoing randomization. Efficacy and safety were evaluated every 2 weeks during treatment and 30 days after the end of treatment. After treatment, patients with a response were followed for up to six months for loss of clinical response. Study personnel were unaware of the patients' white-cell counts.
Participating institutions received approval from their institutional review boards. All patients gave written informed consent. The study was designed by the primary investigators in collaboration with the sponsor. Data were collected from individual sites by the sponsor, who held the data and conducted the initial statistical analyses. The academic authors had full access to the data and vouch for the veracity of the data and data analysis.
Study Procedures and Measurements of Outcome
Efficacy
Disease severity was measured by the CDAI.7 An exploratory analysis, not powered to assess statistical significance, was conducted in consenting patients at selected centers to assess mucosal response with the use of the validated Crohn's Disease Endoscopic Index of Severity (CDEIS). Higher scores reflect increasing severity of mucosal disease.8 Numbers of draining fistulae before and after treatment were also assessed.
Quality of Life
The health-specific quality of life was measured by means of the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ).9 Scores range from 32 to 224, with higher scores indicating a better quality of life.
Safety
All patients were evaluated for adverse events on the basis of their medical history, diary entries, and physical and clinical laboratory examinations. A reduction in the dose of sargramostim of 2 μg per kilogram per day was required in patients with an absolute neutrophil count of more than 40,000 per cubic millimeter. Serum samples obtained at baseline, day 29, day 57, and 30 days after treatment were screened for neutralizing antibodies against sargramostim by an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, followed by a GM-CSF–dependent bioassay.10
Statistical Analysis
The primary end point was a clinical response defined by a decrease from baseline of at least 70 points in the CDAI score at the end of treatment (day 57). Prospectively defined secondary end points included a clinical response defined by a decrease of at least 100 points in the CDAI score, remission (defined by a CDAI score of 150 or less), and an increase in the IBDQ score. Response and remission rates were also analyzed according to the use or nonuse of prior second-line therapy, smoking status, baseline C-reactive protein levels, and the presence or absence of serum antibody against Saccharomyces cerevisiae.11
Using a two-sided Pearson chi-square test, we determined that 120 patients (80 in the sargramostim group and 40 in the placebo group) would need to be enrolled for the study to have a statistical power of 88 percent to detect an absolute difference between groups of 30 percent in the incidence of the primary end point, given a type I error rate of 0.05. Data were analyzed after the completion of the 30-day follow-up visit. No interim analyses were performed.
All analyses included all randomized patients who received at least one dose of study medication, according to the treatment received. Statistical analyses described below were prospectively defined. Patients who prematurely discontinued treatment for any reason were considered to have had no response from that point onward. Missing continuous and categorical data were otherwise imputed by carrying the last observation forward. For time-to-event analyses, data on patients who did not reach the end point were censored at the time of the last follow-up visit. Efficacy data collected after the 30-day follow-up visit were evaluated without any type of imputation for missing data. Patients who withdrew during follow-up were considered to have had a loss of response from that time forward. Comparisons between the two treatment groups were adjusted for the stratification variable. All statistical tests were two-sided, and a P value of 0.05 was considered to indicate statistical significance. The Cochran–Mantel–Haenszel chi-square test was used to compare the two groups, stratified according to the use or nonuse of prior second-line therapy, on the basis of the proportion of patients who met criteria for a clinical response and remission. Changes in CDAI and IBDQ scores were analyzed by means of stratified rank tests, based on Van Elteren's test (a stratified version of the Wilcoxon rank-sum test).
Results
Baseline Measures
Between October 2001 and May 2003, 127 patients underwent randomization at 28 centers in the United States. Three patients withdrew consent before receiving treatment and were excluded from the analysis. Of 124 treated patients, 81 received sargramostim and 43 received placebo. One patient in the sargramostim group was enrolled in violation of the protocol: this patient had ongoing symptoms consistent with the presence of a small-bowel obstruction but was included in all analyses.
All demographic and disease characteristics, including prior use of medications for Crohn's disease, were similar in the two groups except for the median age and the duration of disease, which were younger and shorter, respectively, in the sargramostim group than in the placebo group (Table 1Table 1
Demographic and Baseline Characteristics of the Patients.). Ninety percent of patients had previously received glucocorticoids, and 69 percent had received immunosuppressive agents.Efficacy
Response and Remission
Treatment was discontinued prematurely in 7 patients in the placebo group, as compared with 21 patients in the sargramostim group (16 percent vs. 26 percent, P=0.26). A total of 37 patients in the placebo group (86 percent) and 57 patients in the sargramostim group (70 percent) met the criteria for end-of-treatment (day 57) evaluations.
The difference between groups in the prespecified primary outcome of a clinical response defined by a decrease from baseline of at least 70 points in the CDAI score was not significant on day 57 (54 percent in the sargramostim group, as compared with 44 percent in the placebo group; P=0.28). Although on the basis of the primary outcome, the trial should be considered negative, the rates of a prespecified secondary outcome, a clinical response defined by a decrease from baseline of at least 100 points in the CDAI score and remission on day 57, were significantly higher in the sargramostim group than in the placebo group (48 percent vs. 26 percent, P=0.01, and 40 percent vs. 19 percent, P=0.01, respectively) (Figure 1Figure 1
Percentage of Patients Who Had a Clinical Response, as Defined by a Decrease from Baseline of at Least 70 or at Least 100 Points in the CDAI Score, or Remission through 30 Days of Follow-up.). On day 29, as compared with the placebo group, the sargramostim group had significantly higher rates of response, as defined by a decrease of at least 70 points in the CDAI score (53 percent vs. 28 percent, P=0.006) or by a decrease of at least 100 points in the CDAI score (41 percent vs. 14 percent, P=0.002), and rates of remission (27 percent vs. 9 percent, P=0.01). The median CDAI score was significantly lower in the sargramostim group than the placebo group on day 29 (218 vs. 252, P=0.05) and day 57 (184 vs. 240, P=0.02) (Figure 2Figure 2Median CDAI Scores over Time.). The median time to a response, as defined by a decrease of at least 70 points or at least 100 points in the CDAI score, was also significantly shorter in the sargramostim group than the placebo group (18 vs. 34 days, P=0.004, and 30 days vs. not reached, P=0.003, respectively), as was the time to remission (56 days vs. not reached, P=0.02).Thirty days after treatment, 30 patients in the placebo group (70 percent) and 53 patients in the sargramostim group (65 percent) were evaluated. As compared with patients in the placebo group, patients in the sargramostim group had higher rates of response, as defined by a decrease of at least 70 points or at least 100 points in the CDAI score (48 percent vs. 28 percent, P=0.03, and 42 percent vs. 21 percent, P=0.02, respectively), as well as higher rates of remission (33 percent vs. 14 percent, P=0.02). The mean duration of follow-up after treatment was 9.9 weeks among all patients with a response. The mean time to the loss of a clinical response was 9.7 weeks, and to the loss of remission 7.5 weeks.
Responses occurred in both stratification groups, although response and remission rates were higher among patients who had not received prior second-line therapy than among those who had. There were no significant differences in the rates of response and remission between patients who had normal baseline C-reactive protein levels and patients with elevated baseline levels. Sargramostim-treated patients who had ongoing tobacco use or seropositivity for antibodies against S. cerevisiae had response and remission rates that were similar to those of the overall group.
Mucosal Healing
Mucosal healing was evaluated with the use of the CDEIS in 10 patients in the placebo group and 19 patients in the sargramostim group. Median baseline scores were 5.9 (range, 0.1 to 18.8) in the placebo group and 4.3 (range, 0.0 to 18.8) in the sargramostim group (P=0.16). The median decrease in the CDEIS score within one week after the end of treatment was 1.7 in the sargramostim group and 0.8 in the placebo group (P=0.28). The median post-treatment scores were 5.6 (range, 0.9 to 16.3) and 1.5 (range, 0.0 to 7.3), respectively (P=0.02).
Fistulae
Draining fistulae were present at baseline in eight patients in the sargramostim group and five patients in the placebo group who completed treatment. At the end of treatment, draining fistulae were eliminated in four patients and decreased in one patient in the sargramostim group and were eliminated in two patients in the placebo group.
Health-Related Quality of Life
Improvements in the health-related quality of life were significantly greater in the sargramostim group than in the placebo group on day 29 (increase in the IBDQ score from baseline, 29 vs. 17 points; P=0.02), day 57 (increase, 28 vs. 16 points; P=0.04), and 30 days after treatment (increase, 17 vs. 7 points; P=0.006) (Table 2Table 2
IBDQ Scores.).Safety and Tolerability
Discontinuations
Reasons for early discontinuation among patients in the sargramostim group included adverse events in 11, withdrawal of consent or lack of compliance in 6, worsening disease in 3, and physician's decision in 1. Reasons for early discontinuation among patients in the placebo group were adverse events in three, withdrawal of consent or lack of compliance in two, and worsening disease in two. Four of the patients in the sargramostim group who withdrew because of adverse events withdrew because of injection-site reactions or bone pain, three during the first week of treatment.
Adverse Events
There was no significant difference in the overall incidence of adverse events between the sargramostim group and the placebo group (98 percent vs. 93 percent, P=0.22) (Table 3Table 3
Frequency of Adverse Events That Occurred in at Least 10 Percent of Patients.). The majority of events were grade 1 or 2 in intensity, with three patients in the placebo group (7 percent) and six in the sargramostim group (7 percent) having a grade 3 or 4 adverse event. Two types of adverse events were reported more frequently in the sargramostim group than in the placebo group: injection-site reactions (90 percent vs. 12 percent, P<0.001) and bone pain (37 percent vs. 7 percent, P<0.001). One patient in the sargramostim group had the dose reduced to 4 μg per kilogram per day owing to fever, chills, and injection-site reactions beginning on day 6 and completed the study at this dose. The incidence of injection-site reactions declined after the second week of treatment, and the majority of patients had five or fewer reactions. Bone pain was usually transient (median duration, seven days) and treated with acetaminophen.Three patients in the sargramostim group had serious adverse events that were possibly or probably related to treatment. These included migraine three weeks after the discontinuation of sargramostim in a 29-year-old woman and an episode of anorexia, weakness, and lethargy in a 58-year-old man with poorly controlled hypertension and ischemic cardiac disease. The third patient was a 29-year-old woman who had transient right-sided weakness consistent with the occurrence of a possible demyelinating event after three weeks of treatment. During follow-up over the next four months, the patient's symptoms fully resolved with the exception of a small residual area of sensory deficit. No other diagnoses for her condition were identified. None of these events were associated with thromboembolic disease. One death occurred during the study, but it was determined to be unrelated to study medication. A 55-year-old woman with emphysema and atherosclerotic disease was enrolled in violation of the study protocol owing to ongoing symptoms of abdominal pain, nausea, and vomiting, consistent with the presence of a possible small-bowel obstruction or ischemia. She received sargramostim for 11 days and then was rehospitalized with persistent symptoms. Sargramostim was discontinued, and the patient underwent exploratory laparotomy; she died four days later. Autopsy revealed evidence of bowel infarction and no findings consistent with a diagnosis of Crohn's disease. Before surgery, her sargramostim-induced neutrophilia was resolving and her platelet counts were normal.
Laboratory Findings
White-cell, neutrophil, and eosinophil counts increased during sargramostim treatment. There were no dose reductions because of excessive neutrophil counts. Peak mean counts occurred on day 29 for white cells (24,400 per cubic millimeter; range, 9400 to 53,200) and eosinophils (6500 per cubic millimeter; range, 0 to 34,600) and on day 15 for neutrophils (14,800 per cubic millimeter; range, 5300 to 29,500). Elevated cell counts stabilized despite continued treatment with sargramostim. In all patients, blood counts returned to pretreatment levels after the discontinuation of sargramostim. There was no treatment-related thrombocytosis or clinically significant increases in other types of cells. No significant changes were observed in serum chemical values.
Antibody Formation
Only 1 of 78 patients in the sargramostim group who were tested had detectable neutralizing antibodies on day 57 (titer, 1:400) and 30 days after treatment (titer, 1:200). Sargramostim-induced neutrophilia disappeared in this patient with the development of neutralizing antibodies. Absolute neutrophil counts returned to baseline values despite continued treatment. No drug-related adverse events were observed in association with antibody development.
Discussion
We evaluated a new approach to therapy — using sargramostim to boost patients' immune system — on the basis of the hypothesis that Crohn's disease may result from an innate immune defect. The study was negative as designed, with no significant difference between groups in the rate of the primary end point of a clinical response defined by a decrease from baseline of at least 70 points in the CDAI score on day 57. However, there were positive secondary outcomes with regard to the end points of a decrease from baseline of at least 100 points in the CDAI score and remission on day 57 as well as a decrease of at least 70 points in the CDAI score at other times. Clinical responses were achieved without concomitant immunosuppressive therapy, were rapid and sustained, and were associated with significant improvements in disease-specific quality of life. Improvements were observed in mucosal healing in sargramostim-treated patients. These results suggest that a treatment designed to modulate intestinal innate immune defense may have a role in patients with Crohn's disease.
Injection-site reactions and bone pain were commonly associated with sargramostim therapy and led to the withdrawal of 4 of 81 patients. These events were usually transient and diminished with continued treatment. In at least two patients who had serious adverse events, prior medical conditions may have contributed substantially to the development of these events (e.g., baseline hypertension and a history of small-bowel obstruction and atherosclerotic disease). A third patient, who had transient right-sided weakness, may have had an underlying demyelinating condition, or sargramostim therapy may have brought on this condition. Patients with Crohn's disease are at increased risk for thrombosis and demyelinating disease.12-14 However, given these events, caution is warranted in the use of sargramostim therapy in patients with similar underlying conditions.
This study was undertaken to study the hypothesis that Crohn's disease may result from impairments in innate immunity that contribute to defective intestinal barrier function. Recent observations provide support for this understanding of Crohn's disease. First, chronic enteritis that resembles Crohn's disease develops in animal models of impaired innate immunity or abnormalities of the mucosal barrier.15-17 Second, patients with genetically defined syndromes characterized by marked decreases in the number or function of neutrophils, such as glycogen storage disease type 1b, often have a Crohn's disease intestinal phenotype that responds to treatment with colony-stimulating factors.2,18,19 Third, specific genes have been linked to the development of Crohn's disease, including variants of CARD15/NOD2.20,21 CARD15 activates nuclear factor-κB in response to the detection of muramyl dipeptide, a component of the bacterial cell wall.22,23 In addition to being expressed in monocytes, macrophages, and dendritic cells, CARD15 was recently shown to be present in intestinal epithelial cells, including Paneth cells.24-26 Disease-associated CARD15 alleles impair normal cellular responsiveness to bacteria.26 These data suggest that a deficiency in innate intestinal immune function may contribute to the development of Crohn's disease. GM-CSF enhances innate immune function.4 Furthermore, GM-CSF has been demonstrated to improve mucosal barrier function in the lung and gastrointestinal tract,27,28 and intestinal epithelial cells, including Paneth cells, express GM-CSF receptors and proliferate in response to GM-CSF in vitro.29 The role of GM-CSF in the biology of Crohn's disease remains to be defined.
Supported by Berlex, a member of the Schering, Germany Group.
Dr. Korzenik reports having received consulting and lecture fees from Procter & Gamble, Shire Pharmaceuticals, Isis Pharmaceuticals, Berlex, and Centocor, and research support from Danisco. Dr. Dieckgraefe reports having received consulting and lecture fees from Berlex and Pfizer. Dr. Valentine reports having received consulting and lecture fees from Berlex, Elan, Abbott, Centocor, Procter & Gamble, and Celltech and research support from Berlex, Abbott, Elan/Biogen, Centocor, and Protein Design Labs. Drs. Hausman and Gilbert are employees of Berlex. A U.S. patent entitled “Stimulating Neutrophil Function to Treat Inflammatory Bowel Disease (6500418)” was issued December 31, 2002. Drs. Korzenik and Dieckgraefe are the inventors. The patent is owned by Washington University School of Medicine and licensed by Berlex Laboratories.
We are indebted to all site personnel and patients who participated in the study, to Arlyn Pittler and Claire Blanchette for their meticulous work and dedication, to Todd Gray for biostatistical support, to Lars Breimer for his suggestions and assistance, and to Lily Chan for her critical review of the manuscript.
Source Information
From the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Center, Gastrointestinal Unit, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston (J.R.K.); the Division of Gastroenterology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis (B.K.D.); the Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, University of Florida, Gainesville, and the Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Gainesville (J.F.V.); and Berlex, Seattle (D.F.H., M.J.G.).
Address reprint requests to Dr. Korzenik at MGH Crohn's and Colitis Center, Gastrointestinal Unit, Massachusetts General Hospital, 100 Charles River Plaza, 9th Fl., Cambridge St., Boston, MA 02114, or at jkorzenik@partners.org.
Members of the Sargramostim in Crohn's Disease Study Group are listed in the Appendix.
Appendix
The members of the Sargramostim in Crohn's Disease Study Group are as follows: Wake Research Associates, Raleigh, N.C. — C. Barish; Minor and James Medical, Seattle — C. Bedard; Presbyterian Medical Center, Philadelphia — J. Deren; University of Kentucky Medical Center, Lexington — W.J.S. deVilliers; Digestive Disorders Associates, Annapolis, Md. — M. Epstein; University of Louisville, Louisville, Ky. — S. Galandiuk; Gastroenterology Association of the East Bay Medical Group, Berkeley, Calif. — S. Goldberg; Winthrop University Hospital, Mineola, N.Y. — J. Grendell; University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill — K. Isaacs; Gastrointestinal and Liver Specialist of Tidewater, Norfolk, Va. — D. Johnson; Long Island Clinical Research Associates, Great Neck, N.Y. — S. Katz; West Hills Gastroenterology Associates, Portland, Oreg. — G. Koval; Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland — B. Lashner; University of Washington Medical Center, Seattle — S. Lee; Albany Medical Center Hospital, Albany, N.Y. — R. MacDermott; Minnesota Gastroenterology, St. Paul — R. McCabe, Jr.; Oklahoma Foundation for Digestive Research, Oklahoma City — P. Miner, Jr.; McGuire Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Richmond, Va. — W. Pandak, Jr.; Columbia Gastroenterology Associates, Columbia, S.C. — J. Popp, Jr.; Nashville Medical Research Institute, Nashville — R. Pruitt; University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh — M. Regueiro; Consultants for Clinical Research, Cincinnati — M. Safdi; Washington University Medical Center, St. Louis — C. Stone; Mount Sinai Medical Center, New York — T. Ullman; University of Florida and Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Gainesville — J. Valentine; Atlanta Gastroenterology Associates, Atlanta — D. Wolf; Gastroenterology Center of the MidSouth, Memphis, Tenn. — Z. Younes; Clinical Trials Management of Boca Raton, Boca Raton, Fla. — A. Zwick.
- References
References
1
Podolsky DK . Inflammatory bowel disease. N Engl J Med 2002;347:417-429
Full Text | Web of Science | Medline2
Korzenik JR ,Dieckgraefe BK . Is Crohn's disease an immunodeficiency? A hypothesis suggesting possible early events in the pathogenesis of Crohn's disease. Dig Dis Sci 2000;45:1121-1129
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline3
Wilk JN ,Viney JL . GM-CSF treatment for Crohn's disease: a stimulating new therapy? Curr Opin Investig Drugs 2002;3:1291-1296
Medline4
Armitage JO . Emerging applications of recombinant human granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor. Blood 1998;92:4491-4508
Web of Science | Medline5
Fukuzawa H ,Sawada M ,Kayahara T , et al. Identification of GM-CSF in Paneth cells using single-cell RT-PCR. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2003;312:897-902
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline6
Dieckgraefe BK ,Korzenik JR . Treatment of active Crohn's disease with recombinant human granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor. Lancet 2002;360:1478-1480
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline7
Best WR ,Becktel JM ,Singleton JW . Re-derived values of the eight coefficients of the Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI). Gastroenterology 1979;77:843-846
Web of Science | Medline8
Mary JY ,Modigliani R . Development and validation of an endoscopic index of the severity for Crohn's disease: a prospective multicentre study. Gut 1989;30:983-989
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline9
Irvine EJ ,Feagan B ,Rochon J , et al. Quality of life: a valid and reliable measure of therapeutic efficacy in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease. Gastroenterology 1994;106:287-296
Web of Science | Medline10
Kitamura T ,Tojo A ,Kuwaki T , et al. Identification and analysis of human erythropoietin receptors on a factor-dependent cell line, TF-1. Blood 1989;73:375-380
Web of Science | Medline11
Peeters M ,Joossens S ,Vermeire S ,Vlietinck R ,Bossuyt X ,Rutgeerts P . Diagnostic value of anti-Saccharomyces cerevisiae and antineutrophil cytoplasmic autoantibodies in inflammatory bowel disease. Am J Gastroenterol 2001;96:730-734
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline12
Miehsler W ,Reinisch W ,Valic E , et al. Is inflammatory bowel disease an independent and disease specific risk factor for thromboembolism? Gut 2004;53:542-548
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline13
Talbot RW ,Heppell J ,Dozois RR ,Beart RW Jr . Vascular complications of inflammatory bowel disease. Mayo Clin Proc 1986;61:140-145
Web of Science | Medline14
Kimura K ,Hunter SF ,Thollander MS , et al. Concurrence of inflammatory bowel disease and multiple sclerosis. Mayo Clin Proc 2000;75:802-806
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline15
Welte T ,Zhang SS ,Wang T , et al. STAT3 deletion during hematopoiesis causes Crohn's disease-like pathogenesis and lethality: a critical role of STAT3 in innate immunity. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2003;100:1879-1884
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline16
Hermiston ML ,Gordon JI . Inflammatory bowel disease and adenomas in mice expressing a dominant negative N-cadherin. Science 1995;270:1203-1207
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline17
Yamanaka R ,Barlow C ,Lekstrom-Himes J , et al. Impaired granulopoiesis, myelodysplasia, and early lethality in CCAAT/enhancer binding protein epsilon-deficient mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1997;94:13187-13192
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline18
Dieckgraefe BK ,Korzenik JR ,Husain A ,Dieruf L . Association of glycogen storage disease 1b and Crohn disease: results of a North American survey. Eur J Pediatr 2002;161:Suppl 1:S88-S92
Web of Science | Medline19
Couper R ,Kapelushnik J ,Griffiths AM . Neutrophil dysfunction in glycogen storage disease Ib: association with Crohn's-like colitis. Gastroenterology 1991;100:549-554
Web of Science | Medline20
Ogura Y ,Bonen DK ,Inohara N , et al. A frameshift mutation in NOD2 associated with susceptibility to Crohn's disease. Nature 2001;411:603-606
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline21
Hugot JP ,Chamaillard M ,Zouali H , et al. Association of NOD2 leucine-rich repeat variants with susceptibility to Crohn's disease. Nature 2001;411:599-603
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline22
Girardin SE ,Boneca IG ,Viala J , et al. Nod2 is a general sensor of peptidoglycan through muramyl dipeptide (MDP) detection. J Biol Chem 2003;278:8869-8872
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline23
Inohara N ,Ogura Y ,Fontalba A , et al. Host recognition of bacterial muramyl dipeptide mediated through NOD2: implications for Crohn's disease. J Biol Chem 2003;278:5509-5512
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline24
Ogura Y ,Lala S ,Xin W , et al. Expression of NOD2 in Paneth cells: a possible link to Crohn's colitis. Gut 2003;52:1591-1597
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline25
Lala S ,Ogura Y ,Osborne C , et al. Crohn's disease and the NOD2 gene: a role for Paneth cells. Gastroenterology 2003;125:47-57
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline26
Hisamatsu T ,Suzuki M ,Reinecker HC ,Nadeau WJ ,McCormick BA ,Podolsky DK . CARD15/NOD2 functions as an antibacterial factor in human intestinal epithelial cells. Gastroenterology 2003;124:993-1000
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline27
Pelaez A ,Bechara RI ,Joshi PC ,Brown LA ,Guidot DM . Granulocyte/macrophage colony-stimulating factor treatment improves alveolar epithelial barrier function in alcoholic rat lung. Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol 2004;286:L106-L111
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline28
Unal AE ,Cevikel MH ,Ozgun H ,Tunger A . Effect of granulocyte-macrophage colony stimulating factor on bacterial translocation after experimental obstructive jaundice. Eur J Surg 2001;167:366-370
CrossRef | Medline29
Ramsay RG ,Micallef SJ ,Williams B , et al. Colony-stimulating factor-1 promotes clonogenic growth of normal murine colonic crypt epithelia cells in vitro. J Interferon Cytokine Res 2004;24:416-427
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline
- Citing Articles (107)
Citing Articles
1
Dawn M. Wiese, David A. Schwartz. (2012) Managing Perianal Crohn’s Disease. Current Gastroenterology Reports
CrossRef2
Lee Roth, John K MacDonald, John WD McDonald, Nilesh Chande, Nilesh Chande. 2011. Sargramostim (GM-CSF) for induction of remission in Crohn's disease. .
CrossRef3
Mario Cottone, Sara Renna, Ambrogio Orlando, Filippo Mocciaro. (2011) Medical management of Crohn's disease. Expert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy 12:16, 2505-2525
CrossRef4
William Chamberlin, Thomas J Borody, Jordana Campbell. (2011) Primary treatment of Crohn’s disease: combined antibiotics taking center stage. Expert Review of Clinical Immunology 7:6, 751-760
CrossRef5
R. Hanaoka, Y. Ueno, S. Tanaka, K. Nagai, T. Onitake, K. Yoshioka, K. Chayama. (2011) The Water-Soluble Extract from Cultured Medium of Ganoderma lucidum (Reishi) Mycelia (Designated as MAK) Ameliorates Murine Colitis Induced by Trinitrobenzene Sulphonic Acid. Scandinavian Journal of Immunology 74:5, 454-462
CrossRef6
Jonathan I. Goldstein, Douglas J. Kominsky, Nicole Jacobson, Brittelle Bowers, Kirsten Regalia, Gregory L. Austin, Melinda Yousefi, Michael T. Falta, Andrew P. Fontenot, Mark E. Gerich, Lucy Golden–Mason, Sean P. Colgan. (2011) Defective Leukocyte GM-CSF Receptor (CD116) Expression and Function in Inflammatory Bowel Disease. Gastroenterology 141:1, 208-216
CrossRef7
Daniel JB Marks. (2011) Defective innate immunity in inflammatory bowel disease: a Crohnʼs disease exclusivity?. Current Opinion in Gastroenterology 27:4, 328-334
CrossRef8
Glenn Dranoff. (2011) Granulocyte-Macrophage Colony Stimulating Factor and Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Establishing a Connection. Gastroenterology 141:1, 28-31
CrossRef9
Cade M Nylund, Sharon DʼMello, Mi-Ok Kim, Erin Bonkowski, Jan Däbritz, Dirk Foell, Jon Meddings, Bruce C Trapnell, Lee A Denson. (2011) Granulocyte Macrophage-Colony-stimulating Factor Autoantibodies and Increased Intestinal Permeability in Crohn Disease. Journal of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition 52:5, 542-548
CrossRef10
Eduardo J. Villablanca, Barbara Cassani, Ulrich H. von Andrian, J. Rodrigo Mora. (2011) Blocking Lymphocyte Localization to the Gastrointestinal Mucosa as a Therapeutic Strategy for Inflammatory Bowel Diseases. Gastroenterology 140:6, 1776-1784.e5
CrossRef11
Anja Schirbel, Claudio Fiocchi. (2011) Targeting the innate immune system in pediatric inflammatory bowel disease. Expert Review of Gastroenterology & Hepatology 5:1, 33-41
CrossRef12
Shervin Rabizadeh, Jeffrey Hyams, Marla Dubinsky. 2011. Crohn’s Disease. , 472-489.
CrossRef13
Edward V. Loftus, Scott J. Johnson, Si-Tien Wang, Eric Wu, Parvez M. Mulani, Jingdong Chao. (2011) Risk-benefit analysis of adalimumab versus traditional non-biologic therapies for patients with Crohn's disease. Inflammatory Bowel Diseases 17:1, 127-140
CrossRef14
Satheesh K. Sainathan, Kumar S. Bishnupuri, Konrad Aden, Qizhi Luo, Courtney W. Houchen, Shrikant Anant, Brian K. Dieckgraefe. (2011) Toll-like receptor-7 ligand imiquimod induces type I interferon and antimicrobial peptides to ameliorate dextran sodium sulfate-induced acute colitis. Inflammatory Bowel Diseasesn/a-n/a
CrossRef15
Kumar Krishnan, Baron Arnone, Alan Buchman. (2011) Intestinal growth factors: Potential use in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease and their role in mucosal healing. Inflammatory Bowel Diseases 17:1, 410-422
CrossRef16
Kyeong Ok Kim, Byung Ik Jang. (2011) Emerging Drugs in the Treatment of Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Beyond Anti-TNF-α. The Korean Journal of Gastroenterology 58:5, 235
CrossRef17
Laia Egea, Yoshihiro Hirata, Martin F Kagnoff. (2010) GM-CSF: a role in immune and inflammatory reactions in the intestine. Expert Review of Gastroenterology & Hepatology 4:6, 723-731
CrossRef18
Manfred Kopf, Martin F. Bachmann, Benjamin J. Marsland. (2010) Averting inflammation by targeting the cytokine environment. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery 9:9, 703-718
CrossRef19
Aiping Bai, Zhikang Peng. (2010) Biological therapies of inflammatory bowel disease. Immunotherapy 2:5, 727-742
CrossRef20
Francesca Mascia, Christophe Cataisson, Tang-Cheng Lee, David Threadgill, Valentina Mariani, Paolo Amerio, Chinmayi Chandrasekhara, Gema Souto Adeva, Giampiero Girolomoni, Stuart H Yuspa, Saveria Pastore. (2010) EGFR Regulates the Expression of Keratinocyte-Derived Granulocyte/Macrophage Colony-Stimulating Factor In Vitro and In Vivo. Journal of Investigative Dermatology 130:3, 682-693
CrossRef21
Francesca Fava, Silvio Danese. (2010) Crohn's disease: Bacterial clearance in Crohn's disease pathogenesis. Nature Reviews Gastroenterology & Hepatology 7:3, 126-128
CrossRef22
Omer N. Koç, Charles Redfern, Peter H. Wiernik, Fred Rosenfelt, Jane N. Winter, William D. Carter, Dan P. Gold, Morgan E. Stewart, Richard G. Ghalie, John F. Bender. (2010) A Phase 2 Trial of Immunotherapy With Mitumprotimut-T (Id-KLH) and GM-CSF Following Rituximab in Follicular B-cell Lymphoma. Journal of Immunotherapy 33:2, 178-184
CrossRef23
Nilanjan Ghosh, Rituparna Chaki, Vivekananda Mandal, G. David Lin, Subhash C. Mandal. (2010) Mechanisms and Efficacy of Immunobiologic Therapies for Inflammatory Bowel Diseases. International Reviews of Immunology 29:1, 4-37
CrossRef24
Judith R. Kelsen, Joel Rosh, Mel Heyman, Harland S. Winter, George Ferry, Stanley Cohen, Petar Mamula, Robert N. Baldassano. (2010) Phase I trial of sargramostim in pediatric Crohn's disease. Inflammatory Bowel DiseasesNA-NA
CrossRef25
Masakazu Takazoe, Toshiyuki Matsui, Satoshi Motoya, Takayuki Matsumoto, Toshifumi Hibi, Mamoru Watanabe. (2009) Sargramostim in patients with Crohn’s disease: results of a phase 1–2 study. Journal of Gastroenterology 44:6, 535-543
CrossRef26
J.F. Rahier, S. Ben-Horin, Y. Chowers, C. Conlon, P. De Munter, G. D'Haens, E. Domènech, R. Eliakim, A. Eser, J. Frater. (2009) European evidence-based Consensus on the prevention, diagnosis and management of opportunistic infections in inflammatory bowel disease. Journal of Crohn's and Colitis 3:2, 47-91
CrossRef27
Xiaonan Han, Kanji Uchida, Ingrid Jurickova, Diana Koch, Tara Willson, Charles Samson, Erin Bonkowski, Anna Trauernicht, Mi-Ok Kim, Gitit Tomer, Marla Dubinsky, Scott Plevy, Subra Kugathsan, Bruce C. Trapnell, Lee A. Denson. (2009) Granulocyte-Macrophage Colony-Stimulating Factor Autoantibodies in Murine Ileitis and Progressive Ileal Crohn's Disease. Gastroenterology 136:4, 1261-1271.e3
CrossRef28
A. Yokota, H. Takeuchi, N. Maeda, Y. Ohoka, C. Kato, S.-Y. Song, M. Iwata. (2009) GM-CSF and IL-4 synergistically trigger dendritic cells to acquire retinoic acid-producing capacity. International Immunology 21:4, 361-377
CrossRef29
Paul Rutgeerts, Severine Vermeire, Gert Van Assche. (2009) Biological Therapies for Inflammatory Bowel Diseases. Gastroenterology 136:4, 1182-1197
CrossRef30
A. Brosbøl-Ravnborg, C. L. Hvas, J. Agnholt, J. F. Dahlerup, I. Vind, A. Till, P. Rosenstiel, P. Höllsberg. (2009) Toll-like receptor-induced granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor secretion is impaired in Crohn's disease by nucleotide oligomerization domain 2-dependent and -independent pathways. Clinical & Experimental Immunology 155:3, 487-495
CrossRef31
A. SWAMINATH, T. ULLMAN, M. ROSEN, L. MAYER, S. LICHTIGER, M. T. ABREU. (2009) Early clinical experience with adalimumab in treatment of inflammatory bowel disease with infliximab-treated and naïve patients. Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics 29:3, 273-278
CrossRef32
Ole Haagen Nielsen, Gerhard Rogler, Dieter Hahnloser, Ole Østergaard Thomsen. (2009) Diagnosis and management of fistulizing Crohn's disease. Nature Clinical Practice Gastroenterology & Hepatology 6:2, 92-106
CrossRef33
Eric Bernasconi, Laurent Favre, Michel H. Maillard, Daniel Bachmann, Catherine Pythoud, Hanifa Bouzourene, Ed Croze, Sharlene Velichko, John Parkinson, Pierre Michetti, Dominique Velin. (2009) Granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor elicits bone marrow-derived cells that promote efficient colonic mucosal healing. Inflammatory Bowel DiseasesNA-NA
CrossRef34
Johannes Sailer, Philipp Peloschek, Walter Reinisch, Harald Vogelsang, Karl Turetschek, Wolfgang Schima. (2008) Anastomotic recurrence of Crohn’s disease after ileocolic resection: comparison of MR enteroclysis with endoscopy. European Radiology 18:11, 2512-2521
CrossRef35
Yasuhiro Nemoto, Takanori Kanai, Shuji Tohda, Teruji Totsuka, Ryuichi Okamoto, Kiichiro Tsuchiya, Tetsuya Nakamura, Naoya Sakamoto, Tetsuya Fukuda, Osamu Miura, Hideo Yagita, Mamoru Watanabe. (2008) Negative feedback regulation of colitogenic CD4 + T cells by increased granulopoiesis. Inflammatory Bowel Diseases 14:11, 1491-1503
CrossRef36
Klaus Kannengiesser, Christian Maaser, Torsten Kucharzik. (2008) Molecular pathogenesis of inflammatory bowel disease: relevance for novel therapies. Personalized Medicine 5:6, 609-626
CrossRef37
Farooq Z. Rahman, Daniel J.B. Marks, Bu H. Hayee, Andrew M. Smith, Stuart L. Bloom, Anthony W. Segal. (2008) Phagocyte dysfunction and inflammatory bowel disease. Inflammatory Bowel Diseases 14:10, 1443-1452
CrossRef38
Masayuki Saruta, Konstantinos A. Papadakis. (2008) Why are cytokines targeted for biological therapy in IBD?. Inflammatory Bowel Diseases 14:S2, S121-S122
CrossRef39
Rodrigue Dessein, Mathias Chamaillard, Silvio Danese. (2008) Innate Immunity in Crohnʼs Disease. Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology 42, S144-S147
CrossRef40
Lydia A. Haile, Reinhard von Wasielewski, Jaba Gamrekelashvili, Christine Krüger, Oliver Bachmann, Astrid M. Westendorf, Jan Buer, Roland Liblau, Michael P. Manns, Firouzeh Korangy, Tim F. Greten. (2008) Myeloid-Derived Suppressor Cells in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A New Immunoregulatory Pathway. Gastroenterology 135:3, 871-881.e5
CrossRef41
Melinda J. Throm. (2008) A Review of the Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapy of Colony-Stimulating Factors. Journal of Infusion Nursing 31:5, 295-306
CrossRef42
Guido Hansen, Timothy R. Hercus, Barbara J. McClure, Frank C. Stomski, Mara Dottore, Jason Powell, Hayley Ramshaw, Joanna M. Woodcock, Yibin Xu, Mark Guthridge, William J. McKinstry, Angel F. Lopez, Michael W. Parker. (2008) The Structure of the GM-CSF Receptor Complex Reveals a Distinct Mode of Cytokine Receptor Activation. Cell 134:3, 496-507
CrossRef43
John A. Hamilton. (2008) Colony-stimulating factors in inflammation and autoimmunity. Nature Reviews Immunology 8:7, 533-544
CrossRef44
Laurent Peyrin-Biroulet, Pierre Desreumaux, William J Sandborn, Jean-Frédéric Colombel. (2008) Crohn's disease: beyond antagonists of tumour necrosis factor. The Lancet 372:9632, 67-81
CrossRef45
Helga-Paula Török, Burkhard Göke, Astrid Konrad. (2008) Pharmacogenetics of Crohn’s disease. Pharmacogenomics 9:7, 881-893
CrossRef46
F. TINÈ, F. ROSSI, A. SFERRAZZA, A. ORLANDO, F. MOCCIARO, D. SCIMECA, M. OLIVO, M. COTTONE. (2008) Meta-analysis: remission and response from control arms of randomized trials of biological therapies for active luminal Crohn’s disease. Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics 27:12, 1210-1223
CrossRef47
Jochen Wedemeyer, Katja Vosskuhl. (2008) Role of gastrointestinal eosinophils in inflammatory bowel disease and intestinal tumours. Best Practice & Research Clinical Gastroenterology 22:3, 537-549
CrossRef48
Arthur Kaser, Herbert Tilg. (2008) Novel therapeutic targets in the treatment of IBD. Expert Opinion on Therapeutic Targets 12:5, 553-563
CrossRef49
Ramón San Miguel, Ana María López-González, Eduardo Sanchez-Iriso, Javier Mar, Juan M. Cabasés. (2008) Measuring health-related quality of life in drug clinical trials: is it given due importance?. Pharmacy World & Science 30:2, 154-160
CrossRef50
Darin L. Lee, Isha Sharif, Shantha Kodihalli, Donald I.H. Stewart, Vadim Tsvetnitsky. (2008) Preparation and Characterization of Monopegylated Human Granulocyte-Macrophage Colony-Stimulating Factor. Journal of Interferon & Cytokine Research 28:2, 101-112
CrossRef51
Frank Hoentjen, Levinus Dieleman. 2008. Pathophysiology of Inflammatory Bowel Diseases. , 341-373.
CrossRef52
A. Noble, R. Baldassano, P. Mamula. (2008) Novel therapeutic options in the inflammatory bowel disease world. Digestive and Liver Disease 40:1, 22-31
CrossRef53
DJB Marks, AW Segal. (2008) Innate immunity in inflammatory bowel disease: a disease hypothesis. The Journal of Pathology 214:2, 260-266
CrossRef54
Satheesh K. Sainathan, Eyad M. Hanna, Qingqing Gong, Kumar S. Bishnupuri, Qizhi Luo, Marco Colonna, Frances V. White, Ed Croze, Courtney Houchen, Shrikant Anant, Brian K. Dieckgraefe. (2008) Granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor ameliorates DSS-induced experimental colitis. Inflammatory Bowel Diseases 14:1, 88-99
CrossRef55
Marcel A Behr, Vivek Kapur. (2008) The evidence for Mycobacterium paratuberculosis in Crohnʼs disease. Current Opinion in Gastroenterology 24:1, 17-21
CrossRef56
Wolf-Rüdiger Schäbitz, Carola Krüger, Claudia Pitzer, Daniela Weber, Rico Laage, Nikolaus Gassler, Jaroslaw Aronowski, Walter Mier, Friederike Kirsch, Tanjew Dittgen, Alfred Bach, Clemens Sommer, Armin Schneider. (2008) A neuroprotective function for the hematopoietic protein granulocyte-macrophage colony stimulating factor (GM-CSF). Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism 28:1, 29-43
CrossRef57
I. Kirman, A. Belizon, E. Balik, D. Feingold, T. Arnell, P. Horst, S. Kumara, V. Cekic, S. Jain, A. Nasar, R.L. Whelan. (2007) Perioperative sargramostim (recombinant human GM-CSF) induces an increase in the level of soluble VEGFR1 in colon cancer patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery. European Journal of Surgical Oncology (EJSO) 33:10, 1169-1176
CrossRef58
M. Flamant, A. Bourreille. (2007) Biothérapies et MICI: anti-TNF et nouvelles cibles thérapeutiques. La Revue de Médecine Interne 28:12, 852-861
CrossRef59
René Fiasse, Olivier Dewit. (2007) Novel therapies based on enhancement of gut innate immunity in inflammatory bowel disease. Expert Opinion on Therapeutic Patents 17:12, 1423-1441
CrossRef60
Anja A. Kühl, Hacer Kakirman, Markus Janotta, Stefan Dreher, Philipp Cremer, Nina N. Pawlowski, Christoph Loddenkemper, Markus M. Heimesaat, Katja Grollich, Martin Zeitz, Stefan Farkas, Jörg C. Hoffmann. (2007) Aggravation of Different Types of Experimental Colitis by Depletion or Adhesion Blockade of Neutrophils. Gastroenterology 133:6, 1882-1892
CrossRef61
Timothy L Zisman, Sunanda V Kane. (2007) Current and future therapies for inflammatory bowel disease. Expert Review of Gastroenterology & Hepatology 1:1, 89-100
CrossRef62
AR Bremner, RM Beattie. (2007) Recent advances in the medical therapy of Crohn's disease in childhood. Expert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy 8:15, 2553-2568
CrossRef63
Jennifer L. Pelley, Chris D. Nicholls, Tara L. Beattie, Christopher B. Brown. (2007) Discovery and characterization of a novel splice variant of the GM-CSF receptor α subunit. Experimental Hematology 35:10, 1483-1494
CrossRef64
Steven J. Brown, Lloyd Mayer. (2007) The Immune Response in Inflammatory Bowel Disease. The American Journal of Gastroenterology 102:9, 2058-2069
CrossRef65
Trevor A Winter, William J Sandborn, Willem JS de Villiers, Stefan Schreiber. (2007) Treatment of Crohn’s disease with certolizumab pegol. Expert Review of Clinical Immunology 3:5, 683-694
CrossRef66
Giovanni Latella, Claudio Fiocchi, Renzo Caprilli. (2007) Late-breaking news from the “4th International Meeting on Inflammatory Bowel Diseases” Capri, 2006. Inflammatory Bowel Diseases 13:8, 1031-1050
CrossRef67
C Janneke van der Woude, Daniel W Hommes. (2007) Biologics in Crohn's disease: searching indicators for outcome. Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy 7:8, 1233-1243
CrossRef68
Michael Clark, Jean-Frederic Colombel, Brian C. Feagan, Richard N. Fedorak, Stephen B. Hanauer, Michael A. Kamm, Lloyd Mayer, Carol Regueiro, Paul Rutgeerts, William J. Sandborn, Bruce E. Sands, Stefan Schreiber, Stephan Targan, Simon Travis, Severine Vermeire. (2007) American Gastroenterological Association Consensus Development Conference on the Use of Biologics in the Treatment of Inflammatory Bowel Disease, June 21–23, 2006. Gastroenterology 133:1, 312-339
CrossRef69
Timothy L. Zisman, Russell D. Cohen. (2007) Pharmacoeconomics and quality of life of current and emerging biologic therapies for inflammatory bowel disease. Current Treatment Options in Gastroenterology 10:3, 185-194
CrossRef70
D. EPSTEIN, G. WATERMEYER, R. KIRSCH. (2007) Review article: the diagnosis and management of Crohn’s disease in populations with high-risk rates for tuberculosis. Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics 25:12, 1373-1388
CrossRef71
Gary R. Lichtenstein. (2007) Medical Management of Crohn's Disease in 2006: What's on the Horizon?. The American Journal of Gastroenterology 102:s1, S2-S6
CrossRef72
Daniel C Baumgart, William J Sandborn. (2007) Inflammatory bowel disease: clinical aspects and established and evolving therapies. The Lancet 369:9573, 1641-1657
CrossRef73
Miguel Rivero Fernández, Antonio López San Román, Elena Garrido Gómez, Miguel Ángel Rodríguez Gandía, Luis Ruiz del Árbol Olmos, José María Milicua Salamero. (2007) Filgrastim en la enfermedad de Crohn refractaria con absceso intraabdominal. Gastroenterología y Hepatología 30:4, 232-233
CrossRef74
Gert van Assche. (2007) Emerging drugs to treat Crohn’s disease. Expert Opinion on Emerging Drugs 12:1, 49-59
CrossRef75
Warren Strober, Ivan Fuss, Peter Mannon. (2007) The fundamental basis of inflammatory bowel disease. Journal of Clinical Investigation 117:3, 514-521
CrossRef76
Theresa T. Pizarro, Fabio Cominelli. (2007) Cytokine Therapy for Crohn's Disease: Advances in Translational Research. Annual Review of Medicine 58:1, 433-444
CrossRef77
G. Düker, M.J. Lentze. (2007) Biologische Therapie chronisch entzündlicher Darmerkrankungen. Monatsschrift Kinderheilkunde 155:2, 118-126
CrossRef78
Bruce E. Sands. (2007) Inflammatory bowel disease: past, present, and future. Journal of Gastroenterology 42:1, 16-25
CrossRef79
J.A. Stockman. (2007) Sargramostim for Active Crohn's Disease. Yearbook of Pediatrics 2007, 164-166
CrossRef80
Xiaonan Han, Bankole Osuntokun, Nancy Benight, Kimberly Loesch, Stuart J. Frank, Lee A. Denson. (2006) Signal Transducer and Activator of Transcription 5b Promotes Mucosal Tolerance in Pediatric Crohn's Disease and Murine Colitis. The American Journal of Pathology 169:6, 1999-2013
CrossRef81
Gert Van Assche, Séverine Vermeire, Paul Rutgeerts. (2006) Focus on Mechanisms of Inflammation in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Sites of Inhibition: Current and Future Therapies. Gastroenterology Clinics of North America 35:4, 743-756
CrossRef82
Qin Ouyang, Rakesh Tandon, K L Goh, Guo-Zong Pan, K M Fock, Claudio Fiocchi, S K Lam, Shu-Dong Xiao. (2006) Management consensus of inflammatory bowel disease for the Asia?Pacific region. Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology 21:12, 1772-1782
CrossRef83
Jan Wehkamp, Eduard F Stange. (2006) Paneth cells and the innate immune response. Current Opinion in Gastroenterology 22:6, 644-650
CrossRef84
Geert D’Haens, Marco Daperno. (2006) Advances in biologic therapy for ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease. Current Gastroenterology Reports 8:6, 506-512
CrossRef85
Torsten Kucharzik, Christian Maaser, Andreas L??gering, Martin Kagnoff, Lloyd Mayer, Stephan Targan, Wolfram Domschke. (2006) Recent Understanding of IBD Pathogenesis. Inflammatory Bowel Diseases 12:11, 1068-1082
CrossRef86
B. BRESSLER, B. E. SANDS. (2006) Review article: medical therapy for fistulizing Crohn's disease. Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics 24:9, 1283-1293
CrossRef87
Sreedhar Subramanian, Barry James Campbell, Jonathan Michael Rhodes. (2006) Bacteria in the pathogenesis of inflammatory bowel disease. Current Opinion in Infectious Diseases 19:5, 475-484
CrossRef88
Bruce E. Sands. (2006) New Therapies for the Treatment of Inflammatory Bowel Disease. Surgical Clinics of North America 86:4, 1045-1064
CrossRef89
M. W. N. HARBORD, D. J. B. MARKS, A. FORBES, S. L. BLOOM, R. M. DAY, A. W. SEGAL. (2006) Impaired neutrophil chemotaxis in Crohn's disease relates to reduced production of chemokines and can be augmented by granulocyte-colony stimulating factor. Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics 24:4, 651-660
CrossRef90
David A. van Heel, Karen A. Hunt, Kathy King, Subrata Ghosh, Simon M. Gabe, Christopher G. Mathew, Alastair Forbes, Raymond J. Playford. (2006) Detection of Muramyl Dipeptide-Sensing Pathway Defects in Patients with Crohn's Disease. Inflammatory Bowel Diseases 12:7, 598-605
CrossRef91
R Balfour Sartor. (2006) Mechanisms of Disease: pathogenesis of Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis. Nature Clinical Practice Gastroenterology & Hepatology 3:7, 390-407
CrossRef92
Sarah A De La Rue, Stephen J Bickston. (2006) Evidence-based medications for the treatment of the inflammatory bowel diseases. Current Opinion in Gastroenterology 22:4, 365-369
CrossRef93
Pieter C. F. Stokkers, Daniel W. Hommes. (2006) Novel biological therapies for inflammatory bowel disease. Current Treatment Options in Gastroenterology 9:3, 201-210
CrossRef94
Janine Bilsborough, Joanne L Viney. (2006) From model to mechanism: lessons of mice and men in the discovery of protein biologicals for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease. Expert Opinion on Drug Discovery 1:1, 69-83
CrossRef95
Susan K. Poole, Anna Nowobilski-Vasilios. (2006) Trends in the Use of Colony-stimulating Factors. Journal of Infusion Nursing 29:3, 151-157
CrossRef96
W. J. Sandborn. (2006) What's new: innovative concepts in inflammatory bowel disease. Colorectal Disease 8:s1, 3-9
CrossRef97
Mario Cottone, Filippo Mocciaro, Irene Modesto. (2006) Infliximab and ulcerative colitis. Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy 6:4, 401-408
CrossRef98
Bruce E. Sands. (2006) GM-CSF. Inflammatory Bowel Diseases 12:Supplement 2, S12
CrossRef99
Trevor A. Winter, Willem J. S. de Villiers, Houssam E. Mardini. (2006) CDP870 in Crohn's disease: Reconsidering Endpoints. Inflammatory Bowel Diseases 12:3, 249-249
CrossRef100
Joshua R. Korzenik, Daniel K. Podolsky. (2006) Evolving knowledge and therapy of inflammatory bowel disease. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery 5:3, 197-209
CrossRef101
Brian W Behm, Stephen J Bickston. (2006) Medical management of Crohn's disease: current therapy and recent advances. Expert Review of Clinical Immunology 2:1, 109-120
CrossRef102
Karin E. de Visser, Alexandra Eichten, Lisa M. Coussens. (2006) Paradoxical roles of the immune system during cancer development. Nature Reviews Cancer 6:1, 24-37
CrossRef103
Matjaz Homan, Robert N Baldassano, Petar Mamula. (2005) Managing complicated Crohn's disease in children and adolescents. Nature Clinical Practice Gastroenterology & Hepatology 2:12, 572-579
CrossRef104
Simon Travis. (2005) Advances in therapeutic approaches to ulcerative colitis and crohn’s disease. Current Gastroenterology Reports 7:6, 475-484
CrossRef105
Pierre Michetti. (2005) What is the impact of polypharmacy in patients with Crohn's disease?. Nature Clinical Practice Gastroenterology & Hepatology 2:10, 448-449
CrossRef106
(2005) Sargramostim activity in Crohn's disease. Nature Clinical Practice Gastroenterology & Hepatology 2:7, 293-293
CrossRef107
Sandro Ardizzone, Gabriele Bianchi Porro. (2005) Biologic Therapy for Inflammatory Bowel Disease. Drugs 65:16, 2253-2286
CrossRef
