Abstract
Abstract Many patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) show an inadequate response or experience a loss of response to advanced therapies. Guidelines recommend dose optimization and switching among therapies until an optimal treatment response is attained. With several advanced treatments available, we aimed to evaluate the persistence of different therapeutic sequences in IBD. The RECORDED study was a retrospective cohort study of Canadians with moderate-to-severely active ulcerative colitis (UC) or Crohn’s disease (CD) who had been exposed to more than 1 advanced therapy between May 2015 and April 2021 for UC, and May 2016 and April 2021 for CD. The primary endpoint was time to permanent discontinuation of the first advanced treatment. Overall, 330 patients had CD and 344 had UC. The most common first-line treatments for CD and UC were adalimumab and infliximab, respectively. The median (95% CI) time to permanent discontinuation of first-line treatment was 12.3 (10.9, 13.6) months in patients with CD and 9.2 (8.2, 10.8) months for those with UC. The most common reason for treatment change across both diseases was lack of efficacy. First-line advanced treatments were optimized in 191 (58.1%) CD patients and 202 (59.1%) UC patients prior to permanent discontinuation. Second-line therapy was typically from a different class compared with the first-line treatment choice. The RECORDED study provides insights into the real-world sequencing and optimization patterns of advanced treatments in patients with moderate-to-severe IBD in Canada. Lack of efficacy was the most cited reason for switching to a different therapy.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
More From: Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology
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.