S47 Treatment Persistence Among Anti-TNF-Experienced Patients With Ulcerative Colitis Switching to Ustekinumab or Cycling to Another Anti-TNF Agent
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Anti-TNF agents are often used as first-line biologic therapy in ulcerative colitis (UC). If the initial anti-TNF fails, switching to a different class of biologics or cycling to another anti-TNF agent may be necessary. Ustekinumab is a recently approved anti-interleukin 12/23 antibody for treatment of UC. This study compared real-world persistence in anti-TNF-experienced patients with UC who switched to ustekinumab or cycled to another anti-TNF agent. Methods: Adults with UC that discontinued treatment with an anti-TNF, and then switched to ustekinumab or cycled to another anti-TNF (index date) between 10/21/2019 and 03/02/2022 were selected from the IQVIA PharMetrics® Plus database. Patients had ≥12 months of continuous insurance eligibility before the first observed anti-TNF without UC-indicated biologics or advanced therapies. During the 12-months before the index date (baseline period), patients had no other immune disorders and discontinued the first anti-TNF. Baseline characteristics were balanced using inverse probability of treatment weights. Persistence was defined as no therapy gaps of >120 days (ustekinumab, infliximab) or >60 days (adalimumab, golimumab) between days of supply. Composite endpoints were persistence while on monotherapy (no immunomodulators/non-index biologics/advanced therapies) and persistence while being corticosteroid-free (< 14 consecutive days of corticosteroids supply after day 90 post-index). Endpoints were assessed at 12 months after the maintenance phase start using weighted Kaplan-Meier analyses and weighted Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for baseline gastroesophageal reflux disease, anal/rectum hemorrhage, and the baseline anti-TNF agent. Results: After weighting, there were 182 patients who switched to ustekinumab (mean age: 40.9; 47.4% female) and 129 patients who cycled to a different anti-TNF (mean age: 40.8; 47.7% female). In the cycle cohort, the index agent cycled to was infliximab for 53.3%, adalimumab for 40.1% and golimumab for 6.6%. At 12 months after maintenance phase start, 78.7% of the switch cohort and 63.8% of the cycle cohort persisted on the index biologic; persistence was 2.11 times higher in the switch cohort versus the cycle cohort (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.11; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.29-3.47; p-value: 0.0031). Moreover, 73.9% of the switch cohort and 49.1% of the cycle cohort persisted on the index biologic while on monotherapy; persistence while on monotherapy was 2.40 times higher in the switch cohort versus the cycle cohort (HR: 2.40; 95% CI: 1.57-3.65; p-value: < 0.001). Finally, 57.0% of the switch cohort and 48.3% of the cycle cohort were persistent and corticosteroid-free; the rate of being persistent and corticosteroid-free trended 31% higher in the switch cohort relative to the cycle cohort but was not statistically significant (HR: 1.31; 95% CI: 0.90-1.89; p-value 0.1607). Conclusions: After discontinuation of an anti-TNF, persistence on biologic therapy was better among patients with UC who switched to ustekinumab compared to those who cycled to a different anti-TNF. These findings may inform treatment strategies for patients on the first anti-TNF agent who require treatment adjustment.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».