英夫利昔单抗和阿达木单抗治疗生物初治溃疡性结肠炎患者的长期疗效比较

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Saudi Journal of Gastroenterology Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-12-30 DOI:10.4103/sjg.sjg_180_24
Muhammed B Durak, Yavuz Cagir, Ilhami Yuksel
{"title":"英夫利昔单抗和阿达木单抗治疗生物初治溃疡性结肠炎患者的长期疗效比较","authors":"Muhammed B Durak, Yavuz Cagir, Ilhami Yuksel","doi":"10.4103/sjg.sjg_180_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To compare the long-term safety and efficacy of Adalimumab (ADA) and Infliximab (IFX) agents in biologic-naive patients with Ulcerative colitis (UC).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The key focus was on specific outcomes such as the requirement of hospitalization due to UC, colectomy, steroid administration, and severe infections that led to the discontinuation of therapy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Anti-TNF treatment was initiated in 208 of the 475 patients with ulcerative colitis. The final study population consisted of 86 biologic-naive patients with UC, including 41 treated with IFX and 45 treated with ADA. No significant differences in treatment details, baseline Mayo scores, risk factors, or demographic features were observed. The ADA group displayed a significantly increased need for steroids (44.4%) compared to the IFX group (14.6%). The UC-associated hospitalization, colectomy, and serious infections were similar between the ADA and IFX groups. Similar outcomes were observed with IFX or ADA as monotherapy or in combination with immunomodulators. The survival analysis revealed IFX had a longer time to secondary loss of response compared to ADA, however, without statistical significance (72.5% versus 46.7%, P = 0.057).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our results hint at the likelihood of IFX and ADA presenting similar clinical outcomes as first-time agents in UC. Nonetheless, the need for steroids with ADA should be taken into consideration.</p>","PeriodicalId":48881,"journal":{"name":"Saudi Journal of Gastroenterology","volume":"31 1","pages":"22-27"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11804968/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of long-term outcomes of infliximab and adalimumab therapy in biologic-naive patients with ulcerative colitis.\",\"authors\":\"Muhammed B Durak, Yavuz Cagir, Ilhami Yuksel\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/sjg.sjg_180_24\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To compare the long-term safety and efficacy of Adalimumab (ADA) and Infliximab (IFX) agents in biologic-naive patients with Ulcerative colitis (UC).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The key focus was on specific outcomes such as the requirement of hospitalization due to UC, colectomy, steroid administration, and severe infections that led to the discontinuation of therapy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Anti-TNF treatment was initiated in 208 of the 475 patients with ulcerative colitis. The final study population consisted of 86 biologic-naive patients with UC, including 41 treated with IFX and 45 treated with ADA. No significant differences in treatment details, baseline Mayo scores, risk factors, or demographic features were observed. The ADA group displayed a significantly increased need for steroids (44.4%) compared to the IFX group (14.6%). The UC-associated hospitalization, colectomy, and serious infections were similar between the ADA and IFX groups. Similar outcomes were observed with IFX or ADA as monotherapy or in combination with immunomodulators. The survival analysis revealed IFX had a longer time to secondary loss of response compared to ADA, however, without statistical significance (72.5% versus 46.7%, P = 0.057).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our results hint at the likelihood of IFX and ADA presenting similar clinical outcomes as first-time agents in UC. Nonetheless, the need for steroids with ADA should be taken into consideration.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48881,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Saudi Journal of Gastroenterology\",\"volume\":\"31 1\",\"pages\":\"22-27\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11804968/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Saudi Journal of Gastroenterology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/sjg.sjg_180_24\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/12/30 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Saudi Journal of Gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/sjg.sjg_180_24","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:比较阿达木单抗(ADA)和英夫利昔单抗(IFX)治疗生物初治溃疡性结肠炎(UC)患者的长期安全性和有效性。方法:重点关注特定结果,如因UC、结肠切除术、类固醇治疗和导致停止治疗的严重感染而住院的要求。结果:475例溃疡性结肠炎患者中有208例开始抗tnf治疗。最终的研究人群包括86名生物初治UC患者,其中41名接受IFX治疗,45名接受ADA治疗。在治疗细节、基线Mayo评分、危险因素或人口统计学特征方面没有观察到显著差异。与IFX组(14.6%)相比,ADA组对类固醇的需求显著增加(44.4%)。与uc相关的住院、结肠切除术和严重感染在ADA组和IFX组之间相似。IFX或ADA单独治疗或与免疫调节剂联合治疗也观察到类似的结果。生存分析显示,与ADA相比,IFX继发性反应丧失的时间更长,但无统计学意义(72.5%对46.7%,P = 0.057)。结论:我们的研究结果提示,IFX和ADA在UC首次用药时表现出相似的临床结果。尽管如此,ADA患者是否需要类固醇仍应考虑在内。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of long-term outcomes of infliximab and adalimumab therapy in biologic-naive patients with ulcerative colitis.

Background: To compare the long-term safety and efficacy of Adalimumab (ADA) and Infliximab (IFX) agents in biologic-naive patients with Ulcerative colitis (UC).

Methods: The key focus was on specific outcomes such as the requirement of hospitalization due to UC, colectomy, steroid administration, and severe infections that led to the discontinuation of therapy.

Results: Anti-TNF treatment was initiated in 208 of the 475 patients with ulcerative colitis. The final study population consisted of 86 biologic-naive patients with UC, including 41 treated with IFX and 45 treated with ADA. No significant differences in treatment details, baseline Mayo scores, risk factors, or demographic features were observed. The ADA group displayed a significantly increased need for steroids (44.4%) compared to the IFX group (14.6%). The UC-associated hospitalization, colectomy, and serious infections were similar between the ADA and IFX groups. Similar outcomes were observed with IFX or ADA as monotherapy or in combination with immunomodulators. The survival analysis revealed IFX had a longer time to secondary loss of response compared to ADA, however, without statistical significance (72.5% versus 46.7%, P = 0.057).

Conclusion: Our results hint at the likelihood of IFX and ADA presenting similar clinical outcomes as first-time agents in UC. Nonetheless, the need for steroids with ADA should be taken into consideration.

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
Saudi Journal of Gastroenterology
Saudi Journal of Gastroenterology GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
3.70%
发文量
63
审稿时长
28 weeks
期刊介绍: The Saudi Journal of Gastroenterology (SJG) is an open access peer-reviewed publication. Authors are invited to submit articles in the field of gastroenterology, hepatology and nutrition, with a wide spectrum of coverage including basic science, epidemiology, diagnostics, therapeutics, public health, and standards of health care in relation to the concerned specialty. Review articles are usually by invitation. However review articles of current interest and a high standard of scientific value could also be considered for publication.
×
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