ArticleJournal of digestive diseases
Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Upadacitinib and Vedolizumab in Biologic-Experienced Patients With Ulcerative Colitis: A Retrospective Study.
Article in Journal of digestive diseases. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesUpadacitinib (UPA) and vedolizumab (VDZ) have been approved to treat moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis (UC); however, direct comparative data between these two regimens are lacking. We aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of UPA and VDZ among patients with moderate-to-severe UC who had previously been treated with advanced therapies.
methodsPatients with moderate-to-severe UC receiving VDZ or UPA for at least 14 weeks following advanced therapy failure, including at least one anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) agent, between 2015 and 2024, were retrospectively recruited. Clinical response and remission were defined by the Partial Mayo Score and the Simple Clinical Colitis Activity Index. The safety profile during the treatment was also compared.
resultsAltogether 66 patients treated with VDZ and 22 patients with UPA were included. The median age of the VDZ and UPA groups was 38 and 37 years, respectively. Patients receiving UPA achieved significantly higher rates of corticosteroid-free remission after 52-week therapy (75.0% vs. 25.0%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 5.68, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.50-21.00, p = 0.011); however, these patients were more likely to experience adverse events (AEs) (40.9% vs. 9.1%; aOR 4.60, 95% CI 1.20-17.00, p = 0.02), although medication discontinuation due to AEs was only noted in two (3.0%) patients receiving VDZ. No patients were hospitalized during the treatment period.
conclusionUC patients receiving UPA achieved significantly higher rates of corticosteroid-free clinical remission but with more AEs, suggesting that decision-making based on disease severity and comorbidities can help guide the positioning of these therapies in 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.