Clinical, Endoscopic, and Radiological Effectiveness of Ustekinumab in Bio-naïve Versus Bio-experienced Patients With Crohn’s Disease: Real-world Experience From a Large Canadian Center
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: With the expanding therapeutic armamentarium for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), real-world data may help inform drug positioning. We assessed clinical, endoscopic, imaging, and biochemical response/remission outcomes in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) treated with ustekinumab in a large Canadian IBD center. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of CD patients was treated with ustekinumab. Clinical, endoscopic, radiological, and biochemical response and remission outcomes were stratified by prior biologic exposure status. Hazard ratios for biologic exposure status were estimated using Cox proportional hazard models and subgroup-specific incidence rates for healing. RESULTS: A total of 231 patients (55.9% female, median 45.8 years) were identified as receiving ustekinumab during the study period, with 2 patients subsequently excluded (N = 229). Of these patients, 79.0% (181 of 229) were bio-experienced, with 38.7% (70 of 181) having failed 1 biologic and 61.3% (111 of 181) having failed ≥2 biologics. At 3 months of follow-up after induction, clinical remission (Harvey-Bradshaw Index ≤4) was achieved by 59.1% (62 of 105) of bio-experienced patients and 79.4% (27 of 34) of bio-naïve patients (relative risk [RR], 1.34; 95% CI, 1.06-1.70; P = .013). Endoscopic remission (absence of mucosal ulcers) was achieved in 37.9% (33 of 87) cases. Rate of endoscopic healing (either endoscopic response or remission) per 1000 person-months was 72.7 (95% CI, 42.4-125.1) and 50.2 (37.9-66.4); and the median time to endoscopic response was 8.4 months (95% CI, 6.4-9.8) and 15.4 months (95% CI, 10.3-17.9) in bio-naïve vs bio-experienced patients, respectively. Imaging response/remission and steroid-free remission rates were higher in bio-naïve patients. CONCLUSION: In this large real-world cohort of CD patients with complex phenotypes and high rates of prior biologic exposure, we observed that ustekinumab was effective and safe with higher rates of improvement in bio-naïve subjects across a range of end points.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".