TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparative effectiveness and safety of infliximab and adalimumab in patients with ulcerative colitis
AU - Singh, S.
AU - Heien, H. C.
AU - Sangaralingham, L. R.
AU - Schilz, S. R.
AU - Kappelman, M. D.
AU - Shah, N. D.
AU - Loftus, E. V.
N1 - Funding Information:
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: Declaration of personal interests: The contents of this study are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. Dr Singh was supported by the National Library of Medicine training grant T15LM011271. Dr Loftus has consulted for and has received research support from Janssen Biotech, AbbVie and UCB Pharma. Dr Kappelman has consulted for and has received research support from Janssen Biotech and AbbVie. None of the other authors have any relevant financial disclosures. Declaration of funding interests: This study was made possible by support from the American College of Gastroenterology Clinical Research Award 2014 to SS, and the Center for the Science of Healthcare Delivery, Mayo Clinic, and a CTSA Grant UL1 TR000135 from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), a component of the National Institutes of Health (NIH).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
PY - 2016/5/1
Y1 - 2016/5/1
N2 - Background Real-world comparative benefits and risks of infliximab (IFX) and adalimumab (ADA) in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) are unclear. Aim To evaluate the comparative effectiveness and safety of IFX and ADA in patients with UC who were new users of anti-TNF agents. Methods Using an administrative claims database (Optum Labs Data Warehouse), we identified patients who received first anti-TNF (IFX, ADA) prescription after a 12-month period without any anti-TNF treatment (baseline), and with a minimum 6-month follow-up after anti-TNF initiation. Primary outcome measures were: all-cause and UC-related hospitalisation, abdominal surgery, corticosteroid use >60 days after starting anti-TNF, and serious infections. We performed 2:1 propensity-score matched Cox proportional hazard analysis, and inverse probability-of-treatment weight (IPTW) analysis, accounting for healthcare utilisation, comorbidities and use of UC-related medication. Results We included 1400 new users of anti-TNF agents (age, 43 ± 15 years; 52% males), from 2006 to 2014. On propensity-score matched analysis, there was no significant difference in the risk of UC-related hospitalisation [IFX vs. ADA; adjusted hazard ratio (aHR), 1.04; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71-1.51], corticosteroid use (aHR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.68-1.06) and serious infections (aHR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.29-1.34) between IFX- and ADA-treated patients; the number of surgical events was very small. On IPTW analysis, risk of corticosteroid use was significantly lower in IFX - as compared to ADA - treated patients (aHR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.68-0.99). Results were stable on multiple sensitivity analyses. Conclusions In a large retrospective cohort of patients with UC who were new users of anti-TNF agents, IFX-treated patients may have lower corticosteroid use than ADA-treated patients, but risk of hospitalisation and serious infections were comparable.
AB - Background Real-world comparative benefits and risks of infliximab (IFX) and adalimumab (ADA) in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) are unclear. Aim To evaluate the comparative effectiveness and safety of IFX and ADA in patients with UC who were new users of anti-TNF agents. Methods Using an administrative claims database (Optum Labs Data Warehouse), we identified patients who received first anti-TNF (IFX, ADA) prescription after a 12-month period without any anti-TNF treatment (baseline), and with a minimum 6-month follow-up after anti-TNF initiation. Primary outcome measures were: all-cause and UC-related hospitalisation, abdominal surgery, corticosteroid use >60 days after starting anti-TNF, and serious infections. We performed 2:1 propensity-score matched Cox proportional hazard analysis, and inverse probability-of-treatment weight (IPTW) analysis, accounting for healthcare utilisation, comorbidities and use of UC-related medication. Results We included 1400 new users of anti-TNF agents (age, 43 ± 15 years; 52% males), from 2006 to 2014. On propensity-score matched analysis, there was no significant difference in the risk of UC-related hospitalisation [IFX vs. ADA; adjusted hazard ratio (aHR), 1.04; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71-1.51], corticosteroid use (aHR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.68-1.06) and serious infections (aHR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.29-1.34) between IFX- and ADA-treated patients; the number of surgical events was very small. On IPTW analysis, risk of corticosteroid use was significantly lower in IFX - as compared to ADA - treated patients (aHR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.68-0.99). Results were stable on multiple sensitivity analyses. Conclusions In a large retrospective cohort of patients with UC who were new users of anti-TNF agents, IFX-treated patients may have lower corticosteroid use than ADA-treated patients, but risk of hospitalisation and serious infections were comparable.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84961262848&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84961262848&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/apt.13580
DO - 10.1111/apt.13580
M3 - Article
C2 - 26991059
AN - SCOPUS:84961262848
SN - 0269-2813
VL - 43
SP - 994
EP - 1003
JO - Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics
JF - Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics
IS - 9
ER -