ArticleAdvances in therapy2021
Subcutaneously Administered Anti-TNFs for the Treatment of Ulcerative Colitis: A Retrospective, Propensity Score-Matched, US Health Claims Analysis.
Article in Advances in therapy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAdalimumab and golimumab are subcutaneously administered anti-tumor necrosis factor α (TNFα) biologics used in the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC). To date, no studies have directly compared treatment patterns and healthcare resource utilization (HRU) among patients with UC receiving these therapies in a real-world setting. The objective of this study was to compare these outcomes among patients with UC treated with either adalimumab or golimumab using a US claims database.
methodsPatients with UC treated with golimumab or adalimumab were identified using the US Optum Clinformatics
resultsOverall, 990 patients were identified (golimumab: n = 277; adalimumab: n = 713). After PSM, 246 patients were included in each group. There were no significant differences between the adalimumab and golimumab groups over the full follow-up period in terms of treatment discontinuations (53.7% vs. 51.2%; P = 0.5881), dose optimizations (35.4% vs. 39.4%; P = 0.3515), or persistence (338.2 vs. 361.2 days; P = 0.4194). During the year after initiating therapy, there were no significant differences in concomitant immunosuppressant (21.9% vs. 21.7%; P = 0.9686) or corticosteroid use (74.7% vs. 78.8%; P = 0.3573) or in HRU outcomes including outpatient office visits (93.3% vs. 94.0%; P = 0.7660), ER visits (15.2% vs. 10.9%; P = 0.2238), and inpatient stays (15.2% vs. 13.6%; P = 0.6680).
conclusionsIn this nationwide PSM cohort study of patients with UC receiving golimumab or adalimumab, no significant differences were observed between groups for treatment patterns or HRU outcomes. High rates of concomitant corticosteroid use, treatment discontinuations, and HRU while on therapy highlight key unmet needs in the treatment of UC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.