Real-world clinical outcomes and healthcare costs in patients with Crohn's disease treated with vedolizumab versus ustekinumab in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To compare real-world treatment persistence, dose escalation, rates of opportunistic or serious infections, and healthcare costs in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) receiving vedolizumab (VDZ) vs ustekinumab (UST) in the United States. METHODS: A retrospective observational study in adults with CD initiated on VDZ or UST on/after 26 September 2016, was performed using the IBM Truven Health MarketScan databases (1 January 2009-30 September 2018). Rates of treatment persistence, dose escalation, opportunistic or serious infection-related encounters, and healthcare costs per patient per month (PPPM) were evaluated. Entropy balancing was used to balance patient characteristics between cohorts. Event rates were assessed using weighted Kaplan-Meier analyses and compared between cohorts using log-rank tests. Healthcare costs were compared between cohorts using weighted 2-part models. RESULTS: 589 VDZ and 599 UST patients were included (172 [29.2%] and 117 [19.5%] were bio-naïve, respectively). After weighting, baseline characteristics were comparable between cohorts. No significant difference in rates of treatment persistence (12-month: VDZ, 76.5%; UST, 82.1%; p = .17), dose escalation (12-month: VDZ, 29.3%; UST, 32.7%; p = .97), or opportunistic or serious infection-related encounters were observed between VDZ and UST. Total mean healthcare costs were significantly lower for patients treated with VDZ vs UST (mean cost difference = -$5051 PPPM; p < .01). Findings were consistent in bio-naïve patients. CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world study, similar treatment persistence, dose escalation, and rates of opportunistic or serious infections were observed with VDZ- and UST-treated patients with CD. However, VDZ was associated with a significantly lower cost outlay for healthcare systems.

Crohn's disease (CD) causes inflammation in the digestive system. Vedolizumab (VDZ) and ustekinumab (UST) are therapies for patients with CD. Little is known about the clinical outcomes and healthcare costs of VDZ versus UST in the real world in the United States. We used health claims data and found that VDZ and UST had comparable real-world clinical outcomes. After 12 months of treatment, the proportions of patients with CD who stayed on treatment and those who needed to increase therapy dose were similar with VDZ and UST. The rate of infection was also similar between the two groups of patients. However, the monthly healthcare costs were $5051 less for patients treated with VDZ than with UST. This was mainly due to the lower cost of VDZ, which was almost half of that of UST. The lower treatment costs with VDZ may provide substantial savings for the healthcare system and patients specifically. Future cost-effectiveness studies on VDZ and UST are needed to aid treatment selection for patients with CD.

Long-term Safety and Efficacy of Etrasimod for Ulcerative Colitis: Results from the Open-label Extension of the OASIS Study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Etrasimod is an oral, selective, sphingosine 1-phosphate receptor modulator. In a phase 2, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in adults with moderately-to-severely active ulcerative colitis [OASIS], etrasimod 2 mg provided significant benefit versus placebo and was generally well tolerated. This open-label extension [OLE] evaluated safety and efficacy of etrasimod for up to 52 weeks. METHODS: In OASIS, 156 patients received etrasimod 1 mg, etrasimod 2 mg, or placebo, once daily for 12 weeks. After completing OASIS, patients could enrol in the OLE and receive etrasimod 2 mg for an additional 34-40 weeks. RESULTS: In all, 118 patients enrolled in the OLE; 112 patients received etrasimod 2 mg at any point and were evaluated for safety and efficacy. A total of 92 [82%] patients who received etrasimod 2 mg in the OLE completed the study. Treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 60% [67/112] of patients receiving etrasimod 2 mg at any time, most commonly worsening ulcerative colitis and anaemia; 94% of adverse events were mild/moderate. At end of treatment, 64% of patients met the criteria for clinical response, 33% for clinical remission, and 43% for endoscopic improvement. Week 12 clinical response, clinical remission, or endoscopic improvement was maintained to end of treatment in 85%, 60%, or 69% of patients, respectively. Steroid-free clinical remission occurred in 22% of overall patients. CONCLUSIONS: In this long-term extension study, etrasimod 2 mg demonstrated a favourable safety profile. Most patients with clinical response, clinical remission, or endoscopic improvement at Week 12 maintained that status to end of treatment.

Economic Outcomes of Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients Switching to a Second Anti-Tumor Necrosis Factor or Vedolizumab.

Background: Anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapies have been the mainstay of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) treatment for nearly 2 decades. Therapies with novel mechanisms of action have been recently developed. This study compared healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs incurred while switching from an initial anti-TNF to another anti-TNF versus switching to vedolizumab. Methods: Adults with IBD who switched from initial anti-TNF to another anti-TNF or vedolizumab were identified from Truven MarketScan claims database (January 1, 2000-September 30, 2017). Patient characteristics were assessed during the 6-month period before the initiation date of the switched-to treatment (index date). Adjusted analyses of all-cause and disease-related HRU and costs during the 6-month period after the index date (study period) were performed. Anti-TNF and vedolizumab switchers with Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) were separately compared. Results: A total of 502 vedolizumab, 1708 adalimumab, 755 infliximab, and 703 other switchers with CD and 461, 428, 311, and 148 with UC, respectively, were identified. Patient demographics were similar across cohorts. Total all-cause costs were significantly higher for vedolizumab than adalimumab, infliximab, and certolizumab switchers in the CD cohort and adalimumab and infliximab in the UC cohort. In both cohorts, adalimumab and other switchers had fewer all-cause and IBD-related outpatient visits than vedolizumab switchers. Conclusions: CD/UC patients who switched to vedolizumab from initial anti-TNF had higher total and treatment costs than patients who switched to another anti-TNF, except for UC patients who switched to golimumab. Prospective studies should be conducted to confirm these findings.

Assessment of the real-world safety profile of vedolizumab using the United States Food and Drug Administration adverse event reporting system.

Vedolizumab is the first gut-selective integrin blocker indicated for patients with Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC). This study aimed to examine the adverse events (AEs) profile of vedolizumab compared to anti-tumor necrosis factors (anti-TNFs) indicated for CD and UC using the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database. AE reports with vedolizumab (5/20/2014-6/30/2015) and CD/UC-indicated anti-TNF drugs (adalimumab, infliximab, certolizumab pegol, and golimumab, during 8/1/1998-6/30/2015) as primary suspects were extracted from the FAERS database. AEs associated with vedolizumab were compared for signals of disproportionate reporting against anti-TNF drugs and all other drugs (1969-6/30/2015), using the proportional reporting ratio (PRR) and the empirical Bayesian geometric mean (EBGM) algorithms. The search retrieved 499 reports for vedolizumab and 119,620 reports for anti-TNFs, with 35.9% and 32.1% of these, respectively, being serious AEs. With the PRR approach, vedolizumab-associated reports had signals for 22 groups of AEs (9 were associated with serious outcomes) relative to anti-TNFs and had 34 signals relative to all other drugs. Signals detected included those reported as warnings in prescribing information and new AEs related to cardiovascular disease. Due to the voluntary nature of FAERS, this finding should be considered hypothesis generating (rather than hypothesis testing). Longer-term observational studies are required to evaluate the safety of vedolizumab.

Reducing Cost and Complexity of Fecal Microbiota Transplantation Using Universal Donors for Recurrent Clostridium difficile Infection.

INTRODUCTION: Fecal microbiota transplantation resolves recurrent Clostridium difficile infections in greater than 82% of patients. Highly screened, processed universal donor fecal material is available. We compared cost and scheduling efficiency of fecal microbiota transplantation by universal donors to patient-directed donors. METHODS: Medical records from a prospectively maintained database of recurrent C. difficile patients who underwent fecal microbiota transplantation between 2012 and 2017 were reviewed retrospectively. Patient-directed donor stool was prepared in our microbiology laboratory using protocol-based screening. We transitioned to purchasing and using universal donor fecal material in 2015. Clinical outcomes, adverse events, time between consult to infusion, consultation fees, and material costs were compared. This was a retrospective comparison of two historical cohorts. RESULTS: A total of 111 fecal microbiota transplantations were performed on 105 patients (56 from patient-directed donors and 55 from universal donors). Median recipient age was 66 years (18-96) with male to female ratio of 1:2.7, equivalent in both cohorts. Total consultation fees were significantly lower in the universal donor group owing to fewer infectious disease consultations. Costs for donor screening and stool preparation were lower in the universal donor cohort ($485.0 vs. $1189.90 ± 541.4, p < 0.001, 95% CI 559.9-849.9). Time from consultations to infusion was shorter in the universal donor cohort (18.9 ± 19.1 vs. 36.4 ± 23.3 days, p < 0.001, 95% CI 9.521-25.591). Recurrences within 8 weeks after fecal microbiota transplantation were equivalent (p = 0.354). Adverse events were equivalent. CONCLUSIONS: Fecal microbiota transplantation using universal donors versus patient-directed donors for recurrent C. difficile showed comparable efficacy and short-term complications. The use of universal donors resulted in significant cost savings and scheduling efficiency.

Disparities in prevalence, location, and shape characteristics of colorectal neoplasia between South Korean and U.S. patients.

BACKGROUND: Colon cancer screening is being introduced in many countries, but standard Western screening approaches may not be appropriate for Asian societies if differences in colon cancer epidemiology exist. Comparative analysis of colorectal neoplasia patterns in South Korean and Western subjects has implications for appropriate screening approaches in non-Western societies. METHODS: The results of concurrent screening colonoscopies performed in average-risk patients 50 to 69 years old in 2 teaching hospitals, Kyung Hee University Hospital (Seoul, South Korea) and Virginia Mason Medical Center (Seattle, Wash), were compared with respect to prevalence, histologic features, anatomic distribution, and shape characteristics of colorectal neoplasia. RESULTS: The U.S. (n = 3460) and South Korean (n = 2193) cohorts were similar with regard to the prevalence of adenomas (28.5% vs 29.8%, respectively, P = .312) and advanced neoplasia (6.4% vs 5.4%, respectively, P = .102), but the proportion of proximal adenomas was greater in the U.S. cohort (62.8% vs 45.9%, P < .001). The prevalence of adenomas and advanced neoplasia was similar in male patients, but there was a greater prevalence of neoplasia (23.5% vs 18.8%, P = .006) and advanced neoplasia (5.1% vs 2.7%, P < .001) in U.S. women than South Korean women. When large (≥10 mm) adenomas were considered, proximal location and nonpolypoid (flat) shape were more common in the U.S. cohort (79.4% vs 37.1%, P = .003 and 43.5% vs 12.3%, P < .001, respectively). The overall prevalence of large flat adenomas in the U.S. cohort was 5 times that of the South Korean cohort (2.6% vs 0.5%, P < .001). Adjustment for sex ratio discrepancies (48.3% men in the U.S. cohort vs 60.8% in the South Korean cohort, P < .001) did not result in any significant changes in the conclusions. CONCLUSION: Compared with Westerners, South Koreans have a more distal distribution of adenomas and advanced neoplasia and lower prevalence of large flat adenomas. South Korean women have a lower prevalence of colorectal neoplasia than Western women. Such disparities suggest that Western screening strategies cannot be directly adopted by other countries, but need to be customized by society.