biostudies-literatureIbing SNIDDK NIH HHSNational Institutes of HealthNIH HHS2629-2638https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC11531069biostudies-literatureUnknown21(10)<h4>Background& aims</h4>Tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists often are used as first-line medications to treat moderate to severe inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), but many patients do not achieve or maintain response. Our aim was to compare the effectiveness of second-line treatments (ustekinumab, vedolizumab, or a second TNF antagonist) after TNF antagonist exposure in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) from 2 electronic health records-based cohorts.<h4>Methods</h4>We identified patients with prior TNF antagonist exposure who switched to a different biologic in the Mount Sinai Health System (MSHS) electronic health records (CD, n = 527; UC, n = 165) and the Study of a Prospective Adult Research Cohort (SPARC) from the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Plexus Program of the Crohn's & Colitis Foundation (CD, n = 412; UC, n = 129). Treatment failure was defined as the composite of any IBD-related surgery, IBD-related hospitalization, new prescription of oral/intravenous corticosteroids, or need to switch to a third biologic agent. Time-to-event analysis was conducted with inverse probability of treatment-weighted data.<h4>Results</h4>Overall, treatment failure occurred in 85% of MSHS and 72% of SPARC CD patients. In SPARC, the likelihood of treatment failure was significantly lower with ustekinumab compared with vedolizumab as second-line treatment (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.54-0.82; P < .001), a trend confirmed in MSHS (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.77-1.04; P = .15). In both cohorts, the superiority of ustekinumab compared with vedolizumab was shown when considering treatment failure as prescription of steroids or a third biologic agent. In UC, no differences between second-line treatment groups were identified.<h4>Conclusions</h4>In 2 independent real-world cohort settings, second-line therapy in CD with ustekinumab after TNF antagonist treatment failure was associated with a lower likelihood of treatment failure than second-line vedolizumab.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological AssociationSecond-Line Biologic Therapy Following Tumor Necrosis Factor Antagonist Failure: A Real-World Propensity Score-Weighted Analysis.PMC11531069R01 DK123758S10 OD026880U01 DK062422K23 DK111995Ibing SCho JHBottinger EPUngaro RCfalseSecond-Line Biologic Therapy Following Tumor Necrosis Factor Antagonist Failure: A Real-World Propensity Score-Weighted Analysis.<h4>Background& aims</h4>Tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists often are used as first-line medications to treat moderate to severe inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), but many patients do not achieve or maintain response. Our aim was to compare the effectiveness of second-line treatments (ustekinumab, vedolizumab, or a second TNF antagonist) after TNF antagonist exposure in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) from 2 electronic health records-based cohorts.<h4>Methods</h4>We identified patients with prior TNF antagonist exposure who switched to a different biologic in the Mount Sinai Health System (MSHS) electronic health records (CD, n = 527; UC, n = 165) and the Study of a Prospective Adult Research Cohort (SPARC) from the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Plexus Program of the Crohn's & Colitis Foundation (CD, n = 412; UC, n = 129). Treatment failure was defined as the composite of any IBD-related surgery, IBD-related hospitalization, new prescription of oral/intravenous corticosteroids, or need to switch to a third biologic agent. Time-to-event analysis was conducted with inverse probability of treatment-weighted data.<h4>Results</h4>Overall, treatment failure occurred in 85% of MSHS and 72% of SPARC CD patients. In SPARC, the likelihood of treatment failure was significantly lower with ustekinumab compared with vedolizumab as second-line treatment (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.54-0.82; P < .001), a trend confirmed in MSHS (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.77-1.04; P = .15). In both cohorts, the superiority of ustekinumab compared with vedolizumab was shown when considering treatment failure as prescription of steroids or a third biologic agent. In UC, no differences between second-line treatment groups were identified.<h4>Conclusions</h4>In 2 independent real-world cohort settings, second-line therapy in CD with ustekinumab after TNF antagonist treatment failure was associated with a lower likelihood of treatment failure than second-line vedolizumab.2023-01-01T00:00:00Z2023 Sep2025-04-26T17:04:03.82Z2025-04-06T15:25:12.502ZS-EPMC115310693678783710.1016/j.cgh.2023.01.038