Efficacy of Organ Preservation Strategy by Adjuvant Chemoradiotherapy after Non-Curative Endoscopic Resection for Superficial SCC: A Multicenter Western Study.

BACKGROUND: In case of high risk of lymph node invasion after endoscopic resection (ER) of superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) can be an alternative to surgery. We assessed long-term clinical outcomes of adjuvant therapy by CRT after non-curative ER for superficial SCC. METHODS: We performed a retrospective multicenter study. From April 1999 to April 2018, all consecutive patients who underwent ER for SCC with tumor infiltration beyond the muscularis mucosae were included. RESULTS: A total of 137 ER were analyzed. The overall nodal or metastatic recurrence-free survival rate at 5 years was 88% and specific recurrence-free survival rates at 5 years with and without adjuvant therapy were, respectively, 97.9% and 79.1% (p = 0.011). Independent factors for nodal and/or distal metastatic recurrence were age (HR = 1.075, p = 0.031), Sm infiltration depth > 200 µm (HR = 4.129, p = 0.040), and the absence of adjuvant CRT or surgery (HR = 11.322, p = 0.029). CONCLUSION: In this study, adjuvant therapy is associated with a higher recurrence-free survival rate at 5 years after non-curative ER. This result suggests this approach may be considered as an alternative to surgery in selected patients.

Comparative Effectiveness of Ustekinumab and Anti-TNF Agent as First-Line Biological Therapy in Luminal Crohn's Disease: A Retrospective Study From 2 Referral Centers.

BACKGROUND: Real-life data on the efficacy of ustekinumab as first-line therapy for the treatment of luminal Crohn's disease (CD) compared with anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) agents are lacking. We compared the clinical response rates at 3 months in 2 cohorts of biologic-naïve patients treated by ustekinumab and anti-TNF agents. METHODS: Biologic-naïve patients starting either ustekinumab or an anti-TNF agent for luminal CD between 2016 and 2019 in 2 tertiary centers were retrospectively included. The primary endpoint was clinical response at 3 months, defined as a Harvey-Bradshaw Index <4 or a 3-point drop in the score without steroids, need for CD-related surgery, or treatment discontinuation owing to failure or intolerance. Patients treated with ustekinumab were matched to patients receiving anti-TNF agents by a propensity score algorithm. RESULTS: We included 156 patients starting anti-TNF agents (95 adalimumab and 61 infliximab) and 50 ustekinumab. After matching, clinical response rates at 3 months were 64% and 86% in the ustekinumab and anti-TNF groups, respectively (P = .01). At 12 months, in multivariate analysis adjusted for disease duration, location, concomitant immunosuppressant and steroids, and symptoms, clinical remission was independently associated with the biological therapy received (odds ratio, 2.6 for anti-TNF agent vs ustekinumab; P = .02). With a median follow-up duration of 40 (interquartile range, 23-52) months, no difference was observed in terms of time to drug withdrawal (P = .29) or safety. CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective real-world data suggest that an anti-TNF agent as a first-line biological therapy is associated with higher rates of response at 3 months than ustekinumab in patients with CD.

We conducted a retrospective real-world study to compare the efficacy of biologics in Crohn's disease. Our data suggest that an anti-tumor necrosis factor agent as a first-line biological therapy is associated with higher rates of response at 3 months than ustekinumab in Crohn's disease.

Comparative efficacy and safety of vedolizumab and infliximab in ulcerative colitis after failure of a first subcutaneous anti-TNF agent: a multicentre cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Few data exist to help select a second biologic agent in patients with refractory ulcerative colitis (UC). AIM: To compare the efficacy of infliximab (IFX) and vedolizumab (VDZ) in UC patients who failed a first subcutaneous anti-tumor necrosing factor (TNF) agent. METHODS: Consecutive UC patients from 12 French centres starting IFX or VDZ after at least one injection of adalimumab or golimumab have been included in a retrospective study. Outcomes were clinical remission at week 14, survival without treatment discontinuation and survival without UC-related event. RESULTS: Among the 225 patients included, clinical remission at week 14 was achieved in 40/154 (26%) patients treated with IFX and in 35/71 (49%) treated with VDZ (P = 0.001). After a propensity score matching analysis, this difference remained significant (odds ratio: 1.67; 95% confidence interval: 1.08-2.56; P = 0.02). With a median follow-up of 117 weeks, survival rates without treatment discontinuation at years 1 and 3 were 50% and 29% with IFX, and 80% and 55% with VDZ, respectively (P < 0.001). Regarding survival without UC-related event, they were 49% and 27% with IFX, and 74% and 52% with VDZ (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: After failure of a first subcutaneous anti-TNF agent, UC patients were more likely to achieve clinical remission with VDZ than those treated with IFX. Although due to prescription habits patients in the IFX group had a significantly more severe disease, these differences remained after adjustments and subgroup analyses. Such results have to be confirmed prospectively and warrant dedicated head-to-head trials.