Abstract

Although studies have compared on-treatment effectiveness of infliximab and vedolizumab in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC), there has been limited comparison of treatment sequencing and long-term patient-centred outcomes. To compare infliximab-first and vedolizumab-first strategy in biologic-naïve patients with UC. We conducted a retrospective cohort study in biologic-naïve patients with UC who were treated first with either infliximab or vedolizumab between 2015 and 2021 and followed over 30 months following initiation. Primary outcomes were the number of hospitalisations, corticosteroid courses and serious infections with either strategy (regardless of switch to alternative therapies) within 30 months. We matched the groups 1:1 through cardinality matching, and fit logistic and zero-inflated negative binomial models to compare outcomes. We included 181 patients (94 vedolizumab-first and 87 infliximab-first treatment strategy). Of these, 144 were matched 1:1. There was no significant difference in the incidence of IBD-related hospitalisations (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 1.98 [95% CI, 0.64-6.10]), corticosteroid courses (0.66 [0.38-1.15]) and serious infections (5.26 [0.62-45.45]), with comparable incidence of medication switches to alternative advanced therapies (1.08 [0.42-2.81]). At 30 months, there was no difference in proportion of patients in clinical remission (69.4% vs. 76.4%; p = 0.45) and endoscopic remission (55.6% vs. 65.3%; p = 0.36). In patients with UC, long-term effectiveness and safety outcomes are comparable with infliximab-first and vedolizumab-first treatment strategies at 30 months. This can help to guide selection of treatment strategies in patients with UC.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.