Comparing real-world continuous clinical remission rates of anti-tumor necrosis factor, vedolizumab, ustekinumab, tofacitinib, and upadacitinib in ulcerative colitis

Clicks: 8
ID: 337671
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #97 of 100 articles by views in inflammatory bowel diseases

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Abstract Background Multiple advanced therapies are available for moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis (UC), but comparative efficacy data are limited. We compared the 1-year efficacy and safety of 7 therapies: the anti-tumor necrosis factor agents infliximab, adalimumab, and golimumab (GLM); the anti-integrin vedolizumab (VDZ); the anti-interleukin-12/23 ustekinumab (UST); and the JAK inhibitors tofacitinib (TOF) and upadacitinib (UPA). Methods In a retrospective, multicenter, propensity score–matched study, all UC patients treated with the 7 advanced therapies between 2014 and 2024 were included. The primary endpoint was the 1-year rate of continuous clinical remission (CCR) for each drug (defined as the induction and maintenance of steroid-free clinical remission, without the need for drug optimization or additional therapy due to relapse, with no adverse events requiring drug discontinuation). Results A total of 1406 patients were included (VDZ = 376, infliximab = 341, adalimumab = 207, UST = 150, GLM = 114, TOF = 103, UPA = 115). Excluding UPA from the overall population comparison as it was used only in bio-exposed patients, UST achieved the highest CCR, with GLM the lowest. UST appeared the most effective therapy in bio-naive patients, whereas other biologics achieved similar CCR rates. As second-line therapy, UPA achieved the highest CCR, followed by UST. As third-line therapy, UPA outperformed UST, VDZ, and TOF. UST was associated with the lowest rates of adverse events. Although UPA was associated with the highest rates of adverse events, drug withdrawal was low. Conclusions In this large multicenter observational cohort, UST was more effective than anti-tumor necrosis factor agents and VDZ as both first- and second-line therapy. In bio-exposed patients, UPA was the most effective advanced therapy.
Reference Key
openalex_W7224171580 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors A. Cassinotti, Simone Saibeni, Rosanna Cannatelli, Marco Michelon, Giovanni Maconi, Flavio Caprioli, Federica Lepore, Antonio Lo Bello, Maria Laura Annunziata, Irene Zammarchi, Michele Dota, E. Anchieri, Valentina Casini, Claudia Delogu, Maria Fichera, Nicolò Mezzina, Marco Vincenzo Lenti, Chiara Ricci, Marco Parravicini, Thomas Chapman, Raffaella Ferraro, Nico Pagano, Pietro Invernizzi, Gianpiero Manes, Vito Annese, Antonio Di Sabatino, Sergio Segato, Maurizio Li Vecchi, Sandro Ardizzone, Annalisa De Silvestri, the A.U.R.O.R.A. 2 Study Group, Luca Pastorelli, Dhanai Di Paolo, Cristina Bezzio, Valentina Zadro, Davide Stradella, Martina Mauri, A. Massari, Roberto Tari, Pietro Occhipinti, Angelo Italia, Eleonora Alimenti, Guglielmo Albertini Petroni, Claudio Camillo Cortelezzi, Simone Segato, Lorenzo Canova, Francesca Ferretti, Francesco Mordà, Fábio Pace
Journal inflammatory bowel diseases
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/ibd/izag229
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/ibd/izag229
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.