P989 临床缓解期炎症性肠病患者从静脉注射到皮下注射维多珠单抗的转换:GETECCU 的一项多中心研究

B Gros, N Manceñido Marcos, J Guardiola, I Alonso Abreu, I Rodríguez Lago, R Alvarado, Á Ponferrada, J Orobitg Bernades, F Argüelles-Arias, F Mesonero, I Guerra, F Cañete, L Madero, P Borràs, G E Rodríguez, M Iborra, J Castro, A Caballero Mateos, M Barreiro-de Acosta, J M Huguet Malavés, E Brunet-Mas, F López Romero-Salazar, B Caballol, Y Zabana, C Suria Bolufer, P Soto, B Castro, S Marín, S Porto-Silva, J M Benítez, A Gutierrez, E Iglesias-Flores
{"title":"P989 临床缓解期炎症性肠病患者从静脉注射到皮下注射维多珠单抗的转换:GETECCU 的一项多中心研究","authors":"B Gros, N Manceñido Marcos, J Guardiola, I Alonso Abreu, I Rodríguez Lago, R Alvarado, Á Ponferrada, J Orobitg Bernades, F Argüelles-Arias, F Mesonero, I Guerra, F Cañete, L Madero, P Borràs, G E Rodríguez, M Iborra, J Castro, A Caballero Mateos, M Barreiro-de Acosta, J M Huguet Malavés, E Brunet-Mas, F López Romero-Salazar, B Caballol, Y Zabana, C Suria Bolufer, P Soto, B Castro, S Marín, S Porto-Silva, J M Benítez, A Gutierrez, E Iglesias-Flores","doi":"10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjad212.1119","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background Despite the established use of intravenous (IV) vedolizumab for treating inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), there's growing interest in exploring the advantages of the novel subcutaneous (SC) administration route. However, comprehensive real-world evidence regarding the extended safety and effectiveness of this approach remains scarce. The aim of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of vedolizumab SC among IBD patients in clinical remission. Methods Multicenter, observational, retrospective study. IBD patients on IV vedolizumab treatment across 24 Spanish hospitals who were in clinical remission were given the option to switch to SC injections or continue with IV treatment. Data encompassing clinical disease activity (assessed through partial Mayo score, and Harvey-Bradshaw Index), biochemical markers (C-reactive protein and fecal calprotectin), adverse events and treatment persistence were retrospectively gathered from prospectively maintained clinical records at baseline, and at weeks 12, 24, and 48. Non-parametric tests were used for comparisons and Kaplan-Meier for survival. Results We identified 166 patients, with 19 excluded due to not being in clinical remission and 8 excluded due to absence of follow-up data, resulting in a final inclusion of 139 patients for analysis. Of these, 36 (25.9%) remained on IV vedolizumab, while 103 (74.1%) switched to SC vedolizumab. Both groups exhibited comparable demographic characteristics including age, gender, disease type, disease duration and extension, previous therapy, presence of extra intestinal manifestations and comorbidities (Table 1). However, there were differences in Crohn’s disease behavior among groups (p=0.013). There were not significant differences in clinical, biochemical and fecal calprotectin remission at week 12, 24 and 48 neither in the overall cohort nor assessing Crohn’s disease or ulcerative colitis separately (Figure 1). At the end of follow-up, median duration 47 weeks (29-49), persistence on the same formulation was 85%,1 (2.8%) patient on IV and 4 (3.9%) on SC withdrew the drug (p=0.810), 5 (4.8%) switched back to IV from SC. Adverse events were reported in 1 (2.8%) IV vs 11 (10.7%) SC vedolizumab (p=0.292), most of them being mild skin reactions to SC injection 3 (2.9%). Conclusion In our study we found that transitioning from IV to SC vedolizumab in patients with IBD in remission showed comparable effectiveness in maintaining disease remission. Switching to SC formulation appears safe with no new safety signals identified and most adverse events being mild.","PeriodicalId":15453,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Crohn's and Colitis","volume":"43 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"P989 Switching from intravenous to subcutaneous vedolizumab in patients with inflammatory bowel disease in clinical remission: a multicenter study from GETECCU\",\"authors\":\"B Gros, N Manceñido Marcos, J Guardiola, I Alonso Abreu, I Rodríguez Lago, R Alvarado, Á Ponferrada, J Orobitg Bernades, F Argüelles-Arias, F Mesonero, I Guerra, F Cañete, L Madero, P Borràs, G E Rodríguez, M Iborra, J Castro, A Caballero Mateos, M Barreiro-de Acosta, J M Huguet Malavés, E Brunet-Mas, F López Romero-Salazar, B Caballol, Y Zabana, C Suria Bolufer, P Soto, B Castro, S Marín, S Porto-Silva, J M Benítez, A Gutierrez, E Iglesias-Flores\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjad212.1119\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background Despite the established use of intravenous (IV) vedolizumab for treating inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), there's growing interest in exploring the advantages of the novel subcutaneous (SC) administration route. However, comprehensive real-world evidence regarding the extended safety and effectiveness of this approach remains scarce. The aim of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of vedolizumab SC among IBD patients in clinical remission. Methods Multicenter, observational, retrospective study. IBD patients on IV vedolizumab treatment across 24 Spanish hospitals who were in clinical remission were given the option to switch to SC injections or continue with IV treatment. Data encompassing clinical disease activity (assessed through partial Mayo score, and Harvey-Bradshaw Index), biochemical markers (C-reactive protein and fecal calprotectin), adverse events and treatment persistence were retrospectively gathered from prospectively maintained clinical records at baseline, and at weeks 12, 24, and 48. Non-parametric tests were used for comparisons and Kaplan-Meier for survival. Results We identified 166 patients, with 19 excluded due to not being in clinical remission and 8 excluded due to absence of follow-up data, resulting in a final inclusion of 139 patients for analysis. Of these, 36 (25.9%) remained on IV vedolizumab, while 103 (74.1%) switched to SC vedolizumab. Both groups exhibited comparable demographic characteristics including age, gender, disease type, disease duration and extension, previous therapy, presence of extra intestinal manifestations and comorbidities (Table 1). However, there were differences in Crohn’s disease behavior among groups (p=0.013). There were not significant differences in clinical, biochemical and fecal calprotectin remission at week 12, 24 and 48 neither in the overall cohort nor assessing Crohn’s disease or ulcerative colitis separately (Figure 1). At the end of follow-up, median duration 47 weeks (29-49), persistence on the same formulation was 85%,1 (2.8%) patient on IV and 4 (3.9%) on SC withdrew the drug (p=0.810), 5 (4.8%) switched back to IV from SC. Adverse events were reported in 1 (2.8%) IV vs 11 (10.7%) SC vedolizumab (p=0.292), most of them being mild skin reactions to SC injection 3 (2.9%). Conclusion In our study we found that transitioning from IV to SC vedolizumab in patients with IBD in remission showed comparable effectiveness in maintaining disease remission. Switching to SC formulation appears safe with no new safety signals identified and most adverse events being mild.\",\"PeriodicalId\":15453,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Crohn's and Colitis\",\"volume\":\"43 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Crohn's and Colitis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjad212.1119\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Crohn's and Colitis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjad212.1119","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景 尽管静脉注射维多珠单抗治疗炎症性肠病(IBD)的方法已被广泛使用,但人们对探索新型皮下注射(SC)途径的优势越来越感兴趣。然而,有关这种方法的扩展安全性和有效性的全面真实证据仍然很少。本研究旨在评估临床缓解期 IBD 患者使用维多珠单抗皮下注射的有效性和安全性。方法 多中心、观察性、回顾性研究。在西班牙 24 家医院接受静脉注射维多珠单抗治疗的临床缓解期 IBD 患者可选择改用 SC 注射或继续接受静脉注射治疗。研究人员从前瞻性保存的临床记录中回顾性收集了基线、第 12 周、第 24 周和第 48 周时的数据,包括临床疾病活动性(通过部分梅奥评分和哈维-布拉德肖指数评估)、生化指标(C 反应蛋白和粪便热保护蛋白)、不良事件和治疗持续性。比较采用非参数检验,存活率采用卡普兰-梅尔检验。结果 我们确定了 166 名患者,其中 19 人因未达到临床缓解而被排除,8 人因缺乏随访数据而被排除,最终纳入 139 名患者进行分析。其中,36 人(25.9%)仍在使用静脉注射维多珠单抗,103 人(74.1%)转为使用皮下注射维多珠单抗。两组患者的人口统计学特征具有可比性,包括年龄、性别、疾病类型、病程和扩展程度、既往治疗情况、肠道外表现和合并症(表 1)。然而,各组间的克罗恩病表现存在差异(P=0.013)。在第 12、24 和 48 周时,无论是总体队列还是分别评估克罗恩病或溃疡性结肠炎,临床、生化和粪便钙蛋白缓解率均无明显差异(图 1)。随访结束时,中位随访时间为 47 周(29-49 周),85% 的患者坚持使用相同的制剂,1 名(2.8%)使用静脉注射的患者和 4 名(3.9%)使用皮下注射的患者停药(P=0.810),5 名(4.8%)患者从皮下注射转回静脉注射。1例(2.8%)静脉注射与11例(10.7%)皮下注射维度珠单抗的患者发生了不良反应(P=0.292),其中大部分是皮下注射后的轻微皮肤反应,有3例(2.9%)。结论 我们的研究发现,IBD 缓解期患者从静脉注射维多珠单抗过渡到 SC 维多珠单抗对维持疾病缓解的效果相当。改用皮下注射制剂似乎是安全的,没有发现新的安全信号,大多数不良反应是轻微的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
P989 Switching from intravenous to subcutaneous vedolizumab in patients with inflammatory bowel disease in clinical remission: a multicenter study from GETECCU
Background Despite the established use of intravenous (IV) vedolizumab for treating inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), there's growing interest in exploring the advantages of the novel subcutaneous (SC) administration route. However, comprehensive real-world evidence regarding the extended safety and effectiveness of this approach remains scarce. The aim of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of vedolizumab SC among IBD patients in clinical remission. Methods Multicenter, observational, retrospective study. IBD patients on IV vedolizumab treatment across 24 Spanish hospitals who were in clinical remission were given the option to switch to SC injections or continue with IV treatment. Data encompassing clinical disease activity (assessed through partial Mayo score, and Harvey-Bradshaw Index), biochemical markers (C-reactive protein and fecal calprotectin), adverse events and treatment persistence were retrospectively gathered from prospectively maintained clinical records at baseline, and at weeks 12, 24, and 48. Non-parametric tests were used for comparisons and Kaplan-Meier for survival. Results We identified 166 patients, with 19 excluded due to not being in clinical remission and 8 excluded due to absence of follow-up data, resulting in a final inclusion of 139 patients for analysis. Of these, 36 (25.9%) remained on IV vedolizumab, while 103 (74.1%) switched to SC vedolizumab. Both groups exhibited comparable demographic characteristics including age, gender, disease type, disease duration and extension, previous therapy, presence of extra intestinal manifestations and comorbidities (Table 1). However, there were differences in Crohn’s disease behavior among groups (p=0.013). There were not significant differences in clinical, biochemical and fecal calprotectin remission at week 12, 24 and 48 neither in the overall cohort nor assessing Crohn’s disease or ulcerative colitis separately (Figure 1). At the end of follow-up, median duration 47 weeks (29-49), persistence on the same formulation was 85%,1 (2.8%) patient on IV and 4 (3.9%) on SC withdrew the drug (p=0.810), 5 (4.8%) switched back to IV from SC. Adverse events were reported in 1 (2.8%) IV vs 11 (10.7%) SC vedolizumab (p=0.292), most of them being mild skin reactions to SC injection 3 (2.9%). Conclusion In our study we found that transitioning from IV to SC vedolizumab in patients with IBD in remission showed comparable effectiveness in maintaining disease remission. Switching to SC formulation appears safe with no new safety signals identified and most adverse events being mild.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信