ArticleInflammatory bowel diseases2024
Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparisons of Filgotinib vs Vedolizumab, Tofacitinib, and Ustekinumab for Moderately to Severely Active Ulcerative Colitis.
Article in Inflammatory bowel diseases, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02914522 (Combined Phase 2b/3, Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Studies Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Filgotinib in the Induction and Maintenance of Remission in Subjects With Moderately to Severely Active Ulcerative Colitis), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
Combined Phase 2b/3, Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Studies Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Filgotinib in the Induction and Maintenance of Remission in Subjects With Moderately to Severely Active Ulcerative Colitis
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Tofacitinib, Filgotinib, and Upadacitinib in Ulcerative Colitis: A Multicenter Real-World Cohort Study.Advances in therapy · 2026Article
- An inverse probability of treatment weighted comparison between vedolizumab, ustekinumab, and tofacitinib in anti-TNF-experienced ulcerative colitis patients.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Propensity score-matched real-world comparative treatment outcomes of Janus kinase inhibitors for ulcerative colitis in patients with and without prior exposure to anti-tumor necrosis factor α antibody.Intestinal research · 2025Article
- Upadacitinib Versus Filgotinib in Ulcerative Colitis: Is the Evidence Sufficient to Inform Treatment Decisions?United European gastroenterology journal · 2024Article
- Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Upadacitinib vs. Vedolizumab, Ustekinumab, and Tofacitinib After Induction and Maintenance for Ulcerative Colitis: Three Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparisons.Advances in therapy · 2024Article
- Anti-ulcerative colitis effects of chemically characterized extracts from CFrontiers in chemistry · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWhere head-to-head trials are lacking, indirect comparative effectiveness can aid treatment decisions. We conducted matching-adjusted indirect comparisons of clinical outcomes with filgotinib vs recently approved comparators (vedolizumab, tofacitinib, ustekinumab) in patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC).
methodsIndividual patient data from the SELECTION trial (NCT02914522) for filgotinib 200 mg were weighted to match average baseline characteristics of active treatment and placebo arms in comparator trials. Efficacy outcomes were compared for biologic-naive and biologic-experienced subgroups in induction and maintenance populations, if data were available. Safety and health-related quality of life outcomes were compared in the overall maintenance population.
resultsFilgotinib had a similar effect on efficacy outcomes compared with tofacitinib, ustekinumab, and subcutaneous vedolizumab in both the induction and maintenance populations. Filgotinib showed improved clinical response vs intravenous (IV) vedolizumab (odds ratio, 2.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.0 to 5.5; P < .05) among the biologic-experienced induction population, and improved corticosteroid-free clinical remission (odds ratio, 15.2; 95% CI, 1.6 to 139.9; P < .05) among the biologic-naive maintenance population. Improved efficacy outcomes were reported with filgotinib compared with ustekinumab among the maintenance population. Higher estimates of serious adverse events were reported for filgotinib compared with vedolizumab IV 300 mg and tofacitinib 5 mg; however, imbalances were noted in their placebo groups. Health-related quality of life outcomes were similar between filgotinib and comparators.
conclusionsMatching-adjusted indirect comparison results suggest superiority of filgotinib 200 mg over vedolizumab IV in terms of clinical response and corticosteroid-free clinical remission in certain patient populations, noting small sample sizes and wide CIs, which may aid the selection of advanced therapies for moderately to severely active UC. A potential increased risk of serious adverse events was reported for filgotinib 200 mg vs vedolizumab IV and tofacitinib 5 mg, but findings should be interpreted with caution owing to underlying imbalances observed between the placebo groups of SELECTION and comparator trials.
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.