RESUMEN
Background: Sequential drug treatment with biological agents in ulcerative colitis (UC) is becoming increasingly complex. There are few studies comparing head-to-head outcomes in second-line treatments. The study assesses whether using anti-tumour necrosis factor (anti-TNF)-α therapy following the α4ß7 integrin blocker vedolizumab (VDZ) or VDZ after an anti-TNF has more favourable clinical outcomes in UC in a real-world outpatient setting. Methods: Patients with UC who were exposed to first-line anti-TNF (adalimumab or infliximab) or VDZ who subsequently switched to the alternate class between May 2013 and August 2020 were identified by reviewing patient databases at 10 hospitals. Data were collected retrospectively using patient records. Baseline demographics, disease activity indices, biochemical markers, endoscopic Mayo score, colectomy rates, treatment persistence and urgent hospital utilisation composite endpoint (UHUC) rates were examined over a 52-week period. Results: Second-line week 52 treatment persistence was higher in the VDZ group (71/81, 89%) versus the anti-TNF group (15/34, 44%; p=0.0001), as were week 52 colectomy-free survival (VDZ: 77/80, 96%, vs anti-TNF: 26/32, 81%; p=0.009), week 52 UHUC survival (VDZ: 68/84, 81%, vs anti-TNF: 20/34, 59%; p=0.002) and week 52 corticosteroid-free clinical remission (CFCR) rates (VDZ: 22/34, 65%, vs anti-TNF: 4/20, 20%; p=0.001). Conclusion: Compared with second-line anti TNF usage, the VDZ second-line cohort had significantly higher 52-week treatment persistence, UHUC survival, higher colectomy-free survival rates and higher week 52 CFCR. These data suggest that VDZ is an effective biologic in UC as a second-line therapy after anti-TNF exposure. It highlights the effect of biological order on clinically important outcomes.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB) results in 25â 000 hospital admissions annually. Patients admitted at weekends with AUGIB have increased mortality, and guidelines advise out-of-hours endoscopy. We present retrospective data from our service involving the interhospital transfer of patients. DESIGN: We pooled resources of two neighbouring general hospitals, just north of London. Emergency endoscopy is performed at the start of the list followed by elective endoscopy in the endoscopy unit on Saturday and Sunday mornings. From Friday evening to Sunday morning, patients admitted to Queen Elizabeth II Hospital (QEII) are medically stabilised and transferred to Lister Hospital by ambulance. RESULTS: 240 endoscopies were performed out of hours from December 2007 to March 2011. Of these, 54 patients were transferred: nine had emergency endoscopy at QEII as they were medically unstable; eight of the patients transferred required therapeutic intervention for active bleeding. The mean pre-endoscopy Rockall score of those transferred was 2.5. We examined the records of 51 of the 54 patients transferred. There were three deaths within 30â days after endoscopy not associated with the transfer process. 19 (37%) patients had reduced hospitalisation after having their endoscopy at the weekend. CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of the out-of-hours endoscopy service in our trust has had multiple benefits, including patients consistently receiving timely emergency endoscopy, significantly reduced disruption to emergency operating theatres, and participation of endoscopy nurses ensures a better and safer experience for patients, and better endoscopy decontamination. We suggest our model is safe and feasible for other small units wishing to set up their own out-of-hours endoscopy service to adopt.
