MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407285707 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwae059.201

A201 USTEKINUMAB VERSUS VEDOLIZUMAB PREDICTORS OF RESPONSE IN IBD PATIENTS WITH ANTI-TNF EXPOSURE: A PRELIMINARY REPORT

2025· article· en· W4407285707 on OpenAlexaffabout
Haya Homsi, Uzair Ali Khan, Bishoy Lawendy, Uzair Abbas, R Khanna, Aze Wilson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmunodeficiency and Autoimmune Disorders
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVedolizumabUstekinumabMedicineTumor necrosis factor alphaInternal medicineDermatologyCrohn's diseaseDiseaseAdalimumab

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Ustekinumab and vedolizumab are biologics that are effective in treating inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Previous studies using propensity score matching have found no significant difference in their efficacy overall. Interestingly, these studies did not highlight clinical variables associated with optimal drug response and other treatment outcomes which could help inform treatment selection for patients after anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) agent exposure. Aims To evaluate clinical variables associated with response to ustekinumab versus vedolizumab in IBD patients with anti-TNF exposure. Methods A single-center retrospective cohort study was conducted in IBD patients with prior anti-TNF exposure, treated with one of ustekinumab or vedolizumab. Participants were assessed for clinical remission at 12 months using the Harvey Bradshaw Index for Crohn’s Disease (CD) (HBI≤4) and the Partial Mayo Score for Ulcerative Colitis (UC) (≤2). Secondary outcomes included 6-month remission, surgery, hospitalization, use of rescue glucocorticoids, adverse events, and treatment discontinuation in patients followed for at least 1 year. Potential clinical variables associated with the primary and secondary outcomes were assessed using multivariable logistic regression analyses for each drug group. Results A total of 118 patients (CD, n=61; UC, n=57) treated at a tertiary care center in London, Ontario, Canada, were included in the analysis. Patients received at least one dose of ustekinumab (n=58) or vedolizumab (n=60). For both the vedolizumab-exposed and ustekinumab-exposed cohorts, 6- and 12-month disease remission were associated with high dose therapy (vedolizumab, 12-month, adjusted OR=6.62, 95%CI 1.95-26, p=0.004; 6-month, adjusted OR=4.77, 95%CI 1.43-17.58, p=0.014 versus ustekinumab, 12-month, adjusted OR=4.08, 95%CI 1.19-15.26, p=0.029; 6-month, adjusted OR=4.57, 95%CI 1.30-18.34, p=0.022). For the vedolizumab-exposed cohort, treatment discontinuation was associated with age (p=0.039), weight (p=0.031) and high dose therapy (p=0.008). Similarly, the need for rescue glucocorticoids was associated with age (p=0.021). No other clinical variables were associated with the primary or secondary outcomes for either cohort. Conclusions Ustekinumab and vedolizumab demonstrated similar efficacy in achieving clinical remission in our study population. The odds of achieving remission from either at 6 and 12 months was higher amongst individuals receiving high-dose therapy. Vedolizumab treatment discontinuation was associated with a younger age and lower weight. No other clinical variables were associated with drug response in either cohort. Larger studies are warranted to confirm these findings and identify other predictors of response that can guide biologic selection in IBD management. Funding Agencies None

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.194 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of GastroenterologySame topicImmunodeficiency and Autoimmune DisordersFrench-language works237,207