Ustekinumab is associated with superior treatment persistence but not with higher remission rates vedolizumab in patients with refractory Crohn's disease: results from a multicentre cohort study.

BACKGROUND

Treatment with antitumor necrosis factor alpha (anti-TNF-α) is safe and effective as first-line therapy; however, its efficacy is limited due to primary nonresponse (PNR) and secondary loss of response (LOR), resulting in treatment discontinuation in approximately 40%-50% of cases. Vedolizumab (VDZ) and ustekinumab (UST) therapies could be good alternatives in patient with anti-TNF failure; however, no head-to-head randomized comparison of these drugs as second- or third-line treatments has been made.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to assess the treatment persistence and comparative effectiveness of UST and VDZ in patients with refractory Crohn's disease (CD).

DESIGN

In this nationwide retrospective study, patients with CD on UST or VDZ maintenance therapy were enrolled. Clinical data at baseline, after induction, and at week 52 were obtained.

METHODS

Clinical and biochemical activities as well as corticosteroid-free remission (SFR) rates were assessed, while concomitant medications, comorbidities, hospitalizations, and surgeries were recorded during the follow-up to detect any predictors.

RESULTS

A total of 161 UST- and 65 VDZ-treated patients completed the follow-up. No significant difference in clinical or biochemical remission rates was observed after induction between the two treatment groups; however, clinical remission rate at week 52 was higher in UST group. UST showed superior drug persistence than VDZ (86.5%, 57.9%,  < 0.0001). The drug type was predictive of clinical SFR at week 52 [ = 0.011, odds ratio (OR) = 2.39 with UST]. Drug failure rates were higher for VDZ than those for UST (PNR rates: 21.54% and 4.97%, respectively,  < 0.001, OR = 8.267,  = 0.001). LOR and escalations were more common during UST treatment (61.5% 36.9%,  < 0.001; 64.2% 23.1%,  < 0.001). Hospital and surgical admission rates did not differ significantly. Only one adverse event occurred with VDZ at week 20, which led to drug cessation.

CONCLUSIONS

VDZ and UST were safe and effective for treating patients with CD in whom anti-TNF therapy failed. UST showed superior drug persistence than VDZ, but dose escalation was more frequent. Biologicals used in lower treatment lines resulted in better drug persistence.