Comparison of real-world healthcare resource utilization among advanced therapy-naïve and advanced therapy-experienced patients with ulcerative colitis initiated on ustekinumab or vedolizumab
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives To describe and compare healthcare resource utilization (HRU) among advanced therapy-naïve and advanced therapy-experienced patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) initiating ustekinumab or vedolizumab in the United States.Methods Claims data from IQVIA PharMetrics Plus de-identified database (01/01/2015–06/30/2022) were used to identify adult patients with UC initiating ustekinumab or vedolizumab (index date) after 10/21/2019. Baseline characteristics were balanced using inverse probability of treatment weighting. All-cause and UC-related HRU (number of inpatient admissions, inpatient days, emergency department visits, and outpatient visits) were described during the post-index period, and Poisson regression models were used to evaluate associations between index therapy and HRU outcomes. Analyses were performed separately among advanced therapy-naïve or advanced therapy-experienced patients.Results A total of 444 (ustekinumab) and 1,917 (vedolizumab) advanced therapy-naïve patients, and 647 (ustekinumab) and 1,152 (vedolizumab) advanced therapy-experienced patients were identified. In advanced therapy-naïve patients, higher rates of UC-related inpatient days (rate ratio [95% confidence interval] = 1.84 [1.15, 3.58]; p = 0.004), emergency department visits (1.39 [1.01, 2.17]; p = 0.044), and outpatient visits (1.81 [1.61, 2.04]; p < 0.001) were observed among patients initiating vedolizumab relative to ustekinumab. In advanced therapy-experienced patients, higher rates of UC-related inpatient admissions (1.47 [1.06, 2.12]; p = 0.012), inpatient days (2.18 (1.44, 3.71); p < 0.001), and outpatient visits (1.50 (1.19, 1.82); p < 0.001) were observed among patients initiating vedolizumab relative to ustekinumab. Results were similar when all-cause HRU was examined.Conclusions Among patients with UC with and without advanced therapy experience, higher rates of all-cause and UC-related HRU were observed among those treated with vedolizumab relative to ustekinumab.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".