Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Therap Adv Gastroenterol ; 17: 17562848241258372, 2024.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39086990

RESUMO

Background: Long-term vedolizumab (VDZ) outcomes in real-world cohorts have been largely limited to 1-year follow-up, with few bio-naïve patients or objective markers of inflammation assessed. Objectives: We aimed to assess factors affecting VDZ persistence including clinical, biochemical and faecal biomarker remission at 1, 3 and 5 years. Design: We performed a retrospective, observational, cohort study. Methods: All adult inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients who had received VDZ induction for ulcerative colitis (UC)/IBD-unclassified (IBDU) were included. Baseline phenotype and follow-up data were collected via a review of electronic medical records. Results: We included 290 patients [UC n = 271 (93.4%), IBDU n = 19 (6.6%)] with a median time on VDZ of 27.6 months (interquartile range: 14.4-43.2). At the end of follow-up, a total of 157/290 (54.1%) patients remained on VDZ. The median time to discontinuation was 14.1 months (7.0-23.3). Previous exposure to ⩾1 advanced therapy, steroid use at baseline and disease extension (E3 and E2 versus E1) were independent predictors for worse VDZ persistence. Clinical remission (partial Mayo < 2) was 75.7% (171/226), 72.4% (157/217) and 70.2% (127/181) at years 1, 3 and 5, respectively. Steroid use during maintenance VDZ therapy occurred in 31.7% (92/290), hospitalization in 15.5% (45/290) and surgery in 3.4% (10/291). The rate of serious adverse events was 1.2 per 100 patient-years of follow-up. Conclusion: VDZ effectiveness appears enduring with favourable long-term safety profile. VDZ persistence was influenced by previous exposure to biologics/small molecules, disease distribution and steroid use at baseline in our study.


Vedolizumab long-term use in ulcerative colitis What was this study done? • Vedolizumab efficacy and safety in ulcerative colitis have been firmly established by existing evidence. • Long-term data from the GEMINI trial further corroborate the favourable safety profile over an extended duration but there is little data on long-term vedolizumab use over 1 year. What did the researches do? • We performed a retrospective, observational, cohort study. All adult IBD patients who ever received vedolizumab induction from November 2014 to December 2021 for ulcerative colitis/IBDU were included. What did the researchers find? • This real-world study demonstrates that vedolizumab persistence exceeds 80% at 1 year and remains nearly 50% at 5 years with no new safety signals. • Worse vedolizumab persistence is associated with prior exposure to biologics/small molecules, more extensive disease involvement and steroid use at vedolizumab initiation. What do the findings mean? • These findings have important implications for drug positioning and sequencing, as well as for optimizing outcomes when vedolizumab is utilized as first-line therapy. Furthermore, it also emphasizes the long-term safety profile.

2.
J Crohns Colitis ; 18(8): 1202-1214, 2024 Aug 14.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38243807

RESUMO

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: No consensus exists on optimal strategy to prevent postoperative recurrence [POR] after ileocaecal resection [ICR] for Crohn's disease [CD]. We compared early medical prophylaxis versus expectant management with treatment driven by findings at elective endoscopy 6-12 months after ICR. METHODS: A retrospective, multicentric, observational study was performed. CD patients undergoing first ICR were assigned to Cohort 1 if a biologic or immunomodulator was [re]started prophylactically after ICR, or to Cohort 2 if no postoperative prophylaxis was given and treatment was started as reaction to elective endoscopic findings. Primary endpoint was rate of endoscopic POR [Rutgeerts >i1]. Secondary endpoints were severe endoscopic POR [Rutgeerts i3/i4], clinical POR, surgical POR, and treatment burden during follow-up. RESULTS: Of 346 included patients, 47.4% received prophylactic postoperative treatment [proactive/Cohort 1] and 52.6% did not [reactive/Cohort 2]. Endoscopic POR [Rutgeerts >i1] rate was significantly higher in Cohort 2 [41.5% vs 53.8%, OR 1.81, p = 0.039] at endoscopy 6-12 months after surgery. No significant difference in severe endoscopic POR was found [OR 1.29, p = 0.517]. Cohort 2 had significantly higher clinical POR rates [17.7% vs 35.7%, OR 3.05, p = 0.002] and numerically higher surgical recurrence rates [6.7% vs 13.2%, OR 2.59, p = 0.051]. Cox proportional hazards regression analysis showed no significant difference in time to surgical POR of proactive versus expectant/reactive approach [HR 2.50, p = 0.057]. Quasi-Poisson regression revealed a significantly lower treatment burden for immunomodulator use in Cohort 2 [mean ratio 0.53, p = 0.002], but no difference in burden of biologics or combination treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The PORCSE study showed lower rates of endoscopic POR with early postoperative medical treatment compared with expectant management after first ileocaecal resection for Crohn's disease.


Assuntos
Doença de Crohn , Prevenção Secundária , Humanos , Doença de Crohn/cirurgia , Doença de Crohn/prevenção & controle , Feminino , Estudos Retrospectivos , Masculino , Adulto , Prevenção Secundária/métodos , Prevenção Secundária/estatística & dados numéricos , Íleo/cirurgia , Recidiva , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Fatores Imunológicos/uso terapêutico , Produtos Biológicos/uso terapêutico , Europa (Continente) , Ceco/cirurgia , Colonoscopia/estatística & dados numéricos , Colonoscopia/métodos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA