Efficacy of ustekinumab vs. advanced therapies for the treatment of moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. (2nd April 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Welty, Margaux; Mesana, Laura; Padhiar, Amie; Naessens, Dominik; Diels, Joris; van Sanden, Suzy; Pacou, Maud
• Is Part Of: Current medical research and opinion. Volume 36:Number 4(2020)
• Page Start: 595
• Page End: 606
• Publication Date: 2020-04-02
• Subjects: Ulcerative colitis -- ustekinumab -- network meta-analysis -- comparative efficacy -- biological therapies; Clinical medicine -- Periodicals; Therapeutics -- Periodicals; 615.5
• DOI: 10.1080/03007995.2020.1716701
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0300-7995

Abstract

Abstract: Objective: To compare the relative efficacy of ustekinumab (UST) vs. other therapies for 1-year response and remission rates in patients with moderate-severe UC. Methods: Randomized controlled trials reporting induction and maintenance efficacy of anti-TNFs (infliximab [IFX], adalimumab [ADA], golimumab [GOL]), vedolizumab (VDZ), tofacitinib (TOF) or UST were identified through a systematic literature review (SLR). Analyses were conducted for clinical response, clinical remission and endoscopic-mucosal healing for populations with and without failure of prior biologics (non-biologic failure [NBF]; biologic failure [BF]). Maintenance data from trials with re-randomized response designs were re-calculated to correspond to treat-through arms. Bayesian network meta-analyses (NMA) were conducted to obtain posterior distribution probabilities for UST to perform better than comparators. Results: Six trials included NBF patients and four included BF patients. In NBF patients, UST as a 1-year regimen showed higher probabilities of clinical response, remission and endoscopic-mucosal healing vs. all treatments: Bayesian probabilities of UST being better than active therapies ranged from 91% (VDZ) to 100% (ADA) for response; 82% (VDZ) to 99% (ADA) for remission and 82% (IFX) to 100% (ADA and GOL) for endoscopic-mucosal healing. In BF patients, UST was the most effective treatment (Q8W dose); however, effect sizes were smaller than in the NBF population. Conclusions: Results indicate a higher likelihood of response, remission and endoscopic-mucosal healing at 1 year with UST vs. comparators in the NBF population. In BF patients, a higher likelihood of response to UST vs. the most comparators was also observed, although results were more uncertain.