Search

Background: Ustekinumab is approved for ulcerative colitis (UC)., Aims: To assess the durability of ustekinumab in patients with UC and its short-term effectiveness, durability and tolerability in clinical practice., Methods: Retrospective, multicentre study of patients who had received their first ustekinumab dose at least 16 weeks before inclusion. Patients were followed until treatment discontinuation or last visit. Only patients with active disease at the start of ustekinumab treatment were considered in the effectiveness analysis. Patients who stopped ustekinumab before their last visit were considered not to be in subsequent remission., Results: We included 620 patients; 155 (25%) discontinued ustekinumab during follow-up (median 12 months). Rate of discontinuation was 20% per patient-year of follow-up. Anaemia at baseline (hazard ratio, HR 1.5; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1-2.1), steroids at baseline (HR 1.5; 95% CI 1.06-2.08) and more severe clinical activity at baseline (HR 1.5; 95% CI 1.09-2.06) were associated with higher risk of discontinuation. At the end of induction, 226 (40%) patients were in steroid-free clinical remission. Moderate-severe vs mild disease activity at baseline (odds ratio [OR] 0.3; 95% CI 0.2-0.5), male sex (OR 0.5; 95% CI 0.4-0.8), and increased number of previous biologics (OR 0.6; 95% CI 0.6-0.8) were associated with lower likelihood of steroid-free clinical remission at week 16. One hundred and seventy-six patients (28%) had at least one adverse event. We observed no negative impact of ustekinumab on extraintestinal manifestations and/or immune-mediated diseases., Conclusions: Ustekinumab durability in UC was relatively high, and treatment was effective in highly refractory patients. The safety profile was consistent with previous studies., (© 2024 The Author(s). Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

(1) Background: Transition is a planned movement of paediatric patients to adult healthcare systems, and its implementation is not yet established in all inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) units. The aim of the study was to evaluate the impact of transition on IBD outcomes. (2) Methods: Multicentre, retrospective and observational study of IBD paediatric patients transferred to an adult IBD unit between 2017-2020. Two groups were compared: transition (≥1 joint visit involving the gastroenterologist, the paediatrician, a programme coordinator, the parents and the patient) and no-transition. Outcomes within one year after transfer were analysed. The main variable was poor clinical outcome (IBD flare, hospitalisation, surgery or any change in the treatment because of a flare). Predictive factors of poor clinical outcome were identified with multivariable analysis. (3) Results: A total of 278 patients from 34 Spanish hospitals were included. One hundred eighty-five patients (67%) from twenty-two hospitals (65%) performed a structured transition. Eighty-nine patients had poor clinical outcome at one year after transfer: 27% in the transition and 43% in the no-transition group ( p = 0.005). One year after transfer, no-transition patients were more likely to have a flare (36% vs. 22%; p = 0.018) and reported more hospitalisations (10% vs. 3%; p = 0.025). The lack of transition, as well as parameters at transfer, including IBD activity, body mass index < 18.5 and corticosteroid treatment, were associated with poor clinical outcome. One patient in the transition group (0.4%) was lost to follow-up. (4) Conclusion: Transition care programmes improve patients' outcomes after the transfer from paediatric to adult IBD units. Active IBD at transfer impairs outcomes.