Cargando…
Comparative efficacy of advanced treatments in biologic-naïve or biologic-experienced patients with ulcerative colitis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
BACKGROUND: Only one head-to-head comparison of advanced treatments in moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC) has been published; therefore, there remains a need for further comparisons. AIM: The relative treatment effects of filgotinib and adalimumab, golimumab, infliximab, tofacitin...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer International Publishing
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10147762/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36484968 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11096-022-01509-1 |
_version_ | 1785034859659395072 |
---|---|
author | Lu, Xiaoyan Jarrett, James Sadler, Susannah Tan, Min Dennis, James Jairath, Vipul |
author_facet | Lu, Xiaoyan Jarrett, James Sadler, Susannah Tan, Min Dennis, James Jairath, Vipul |
author_sort | Lu, Xiaoyan |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Only one head-to-head comparison of advanced treatments in moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC) has been published; therefore, there remains a need for further comparisons. AIM: The relative treatment effects of filgotinib and adalimumab, golimumab, infliximab, tofacitinib, ustekinumab and vedolizumab were estimated using a network meta-analysis (NMA). METHOD: Systematically identified studies (MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library; searched: inception–May 2019, updated November 2020) investigating treatments for moderately to severely active UC were re-evaluated for inclusion in a Bayesian NMA (fixed-effects model). Relative treatment effects were estimated using different permutations of patient population (biologic-naïve or biologic-experienced), treatment phase (induction or maintenance) and outcomes (MCS response/remission or endoscopic mucosal healing). RESULTS: Seventeen trials (13 induction; 9 maintenance) were included in the NMA; 8 treatment networks were constructed. Most targeted therapies were superior to placebo in terms of MCS response/remission and endoscopic mucosal healing; filgotinib 200 mg was similar to most other treatments. Infliximab 5 mg/kg was superior to filgotinib 200 mg (biologic-naïve; induction) for MCS response/remission (mean relative effect, 0.34 [95% credible interval: 0.05, 0.62]). Filgotinib 200 mg was superior to adalimumab 160/80/40 mg for MCS response/remission (biologic-experienced; induction; – 0.75 [– 1.16, – 0.35]), and endoscopic mucosal healing (biologic-naïve; maintenance; – 0.90 [– 1.89, – 0.01]); and to golimumab 50 mg every 4 weeks (biologic-naïve; maintenance; – 0.46 [– 0.94, 0]) for MCS response/remission. CONCLUSION: The current treatment landscape benefits patients with moderately to severely active UC, improving key outcomes; filgotinib 200 mg was similar to current standard of care in most outcomes. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11096-022-01509-1. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10147762 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Springer International Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-101477622023-04-30 Comparative efficacy of advanced treatments in biologic-naïve or biologic-experienced patients with ulcerative colitis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis Lu, Xiaoyan Jarrett, James Sadler, Susannah Tan, Min Dennis, James Jairath, Vipul Int J Clin Pharm Review Article BACKGROUND: Only one head-to-head comparison of advanced treatments in moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC) has been published; therefore, there remains a need for further comparisons. AIM: The relative treatment effects of filgotinib and adalimumab, golimumab, infliximab, tofacitinib, ustekinumab and vedolizumab were estimated using a network meta-analysis (NMA). METHOD: Systematically identified studies (MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library; searched: inception–May 2019, updated November 2020) investigating treatments for moderately to severely active UC were re-evaluated for inclusion in a Bayesian NMA (fixed-effects model). Relative treatment effects were estimated using different permutations of patient population (biologic-naïve or biologic-experienced), treatment phase (induction or maintenance) and outcomes (MCS response/remission or endoscopic mucosal healing). RESULTS: Seventeen trials (13 induction; 9 maintenance) were included in the NMA; 8 treatment networks were constructed. Most targeted therapies were superior to placebo in terms of MCS response/remission and endoscopic mucosal healing; filgotinib 200 mg was similar to most other treatments. Infliximab 5 mg/kg was superior to filgotinib 200 mg (biologic-naïve; induction) for MCS response/remission (mean relative effect, 0.34 [95% credible interval: 0.05, 0.62]). Filgotinib 200 mg was superior to adalimumab 160/80/40 mg for MCS response/remission (biologic-experienced; induction; – 0.75 [– 1.16, – 0.35]), and endoscopic mucosal healing (biologic-naïve; maintenance; – 0.90 [– 1.89, – 0.01]); and to golimumab 50 mg every 4 weeks (biologic-naïve; maintenance; – 0.46 [– 0.94, 0]) for MCS response/remission. CONCLUSION: The current treatment landscape benefits patients with moderately to severely active UC, improving key outcomes; filgotinib 200 mg was similar to current standard of care in most outcomes. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11096-022-01509-1. Springer International Publishing 2022-12-09 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC10147762/ /pubmed/36484968 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11096-022-01509-1 Text en © The Authors 2022, corrected publication 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Review Article Lu, Xiaoyan Jarrett, James Sadler, Susannah Tan, Min Dennis, James Jairath, Vipul Comparative efficacy of advanced treatments in biologic-naïve or biologic-experienced patients with ulcerative colitis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis |
title | Comparative efficacy of advanced treatments in biologic-naïve or biologic-experienced patients with ulcerative colitis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis |
title_full | Comparative efficacy of advanced treatments in biologic-naïve or biologic-experienced patients with ulcerative colitis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | Comparative efficacy of advanced treatments in biologic-naïve or biologic-experienced patients with ulcerative colitis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparative efficacy of advanced treatments in biologic-naïve or biologic-experienced patients with ulcerative colitis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis |
title_short | Comparative efficacy of advanced treatments in biologic-naïve or biologic-experienced patients with ulcerative colitis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis |
title_sort | comparative efficacy of advanced treatments in biologic-naïve or biologic-experienced patients with ulcerative colitis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis |
topic | Review Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10147762/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36484968 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11096-022-01509-1 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT luxiaoyan comparativeefficacyofadvancedtreatmentsinbiologicnaiveorbiologicexperiencedpatientswithulcerativecolitisasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT jarrettjames comparativeefficacyofadvancedtreatmentsinbiologicnaiveorbiologicexperiencedpatientswithulcerativecolitisasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT sadlersusannah comparativeefficacyofadvancedtreatmentsinbiologicnaiveorbiologicexperiencedpatientswithulcerativecolitisasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT tanmin comparativeefficacyofadvancedtreatmentsinbiologicnaiveorbiologicexperiencedpatientswithulcerativecolitisasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT dennisjames comparativeefficacyofadvancedtreatmentsinbiologicnaiveorbiologicexperiencedpatientswithulcerativecolitisasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT jairathvipul comparativeefficacyofadvancedtreatmentsinbiologicnaiveorbiologicexperiencedpatientswithulcerativecolitisasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis |