ArticleCrohn's & colitis 3602024
Effectiveness and Persistency of Ustekinumab Treatment for Ulcerative Colitis: A Phoenix retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in Crohn's & colitis 360, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Towards Precision Medicine in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: Pharmacogenetic Predictors of Ustekinumab Effectiveness and Persistence.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Efficacy of Biologics in Patients with Ulcerative Colitis Exhibiting Non-Response or Insufficient Response to Cytapheresis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Real-world data regarding ustekinumab (UST) for ulcerative colitis (UC) particularly in biologics-naïve patients is currently limited. This study aimed to elucidate the real-world effectiveness and safety of UST for UC. Methods: Overall, 150 patients with UC treated with UST from March 2020 to January 2023 were enrolled across 7 referral hospitals. To assess the clinical efficacy and persistence of UST, retrospective analyses were conducted from weeks 8 to 56. Predictive factors concerning the response and persistence of UST were examined through univariate and multivariate analyses. Results: Of the 150 patients, 125 received UST for remission induction, including 36% biologics-naïve. The response and remission rates were 72.8% and 56.0% at week 8 and 73.2% and 63.4% at week 56, respectively. Biologics-naïve patients represented higher response and remission rates at week 8 (84.4% and 73.3%) than those with biologics exposure (66.2% and 46.2%). Patients with prior antitumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) and vedolizumab (VDZ) exposure had relatively lower response and remission rates (34.5% and 24.1%, respectively). The 1-year cumulative persistence rate was 84.0%. Multivariate analysis revealed that the chronic continuous type and prior anti-TNF and VDZ exposure were negative predictive factors for week 8 responsiveness. Clinical response at week 8 was a predictor of 1-year persistence. Adverse event incidence remained notably low at 6.4%. Conclusions: This study highlights the safety and effectiveness of UST as an induction and maintenance therapy for UC. Chronic continuous type and previous anti-TNF and VDZ exposure negatively contributed to short-term effectiveness, whereas short-term effectiveness provided good persistency.
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.