Observational studyUnited European gastroenterology journal2026
Efficacy and Safety of Second-Line Advanced Therapy After Vedolizumab in Ulcerative Colitis: A Multicenter Cohort Study From the GETAID.
Observational study in United European gastroenterology journal, 2026. 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.
- Efficacy and Safety of Second-Line Advanced Therapy After Vedolizumab in Ulcerative Colitis: A Multicenter Cohort Study From the GETAID.United European gastroenterology journal · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
34 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsVedolizumab has become the preferred first-line advanced therapy in ulcerative colitis (UC). However, the optimal second-line treatment following vedolizumab failure remains unclear. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of second-line therapies after first-line vedolizumab.
methodsWe conducted a multicenter retrospective study including UC patients from 31 centers who received infliximab (IFX), subcutaneous (SC) anti-TNFs, or ustekinumab after vedolizumab failure. The primary endpoint was steroid-free clinical remission (SFCR) at week 14. Predictors of remission were identified using multivariate logistic regression.
resultsAmong 196 patients, 99 received IFX, 27 anti-TNF SC, and 70 ustekinumab. At week 14, SFCR was achieved in 78 patients (39.8%): 38 (38.4%) with IFX, 8 (29.6%) with anti-TNF SC, and 32 (45.7%) with ustekinumab, with no significant difference between groups (p = 0.32). Median treatment persistence ranged from 8 to 9.2 months. Baseline corticosteroid use was associated with lower odds of SFCR (OR = 0.37, 95% CI [0.18-0.73]). Adverse events occurred in 15.8% of patients, including 12.2% serious events. Overall adverse events were less frequent with ustekinumab than with IFX (10.0% vs. 24.2%, p = 0.02), while serious events were comparable (5.7% vs. 16.1%, p = 0.08). Discontinuation due to adverse events was more frequent with IFX (12.1%) and anti-TNF SC (14.8%) than with ustekinumab (2.9%, p = 0.045 and 0.049).
conclusionIn UC patients failing vedolizumab, second-line IFX, anti-TNF SC, and ustekinumab showed similar effectiveness and persistence. Infliximab remains a robust option for rapid control in high inflammatory burden, whereas ustekinumab may be preferred for its superior safety profile in high-risk patients.
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.