Real‐world effectiveness of vedolizumab compared to anti‐TNF agents in biologic‐naïve patients with ulcerative colitis: A two‐year propensity‐score‐adjusted analysis from the prospective, observational VEDO_IBD‐study

Abstract

Background: This observational real-world evidence (RWE) study is based on prospectively collected data from the VEDO IBD registry study. Aim:To compare the effectiveness of vedolizumab and anti-TNF agents in biologicnaïve patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) at the end of induction and during maintenance treatment.Methods: Between 2017 and 2020, we enrolled 512 patients with UC starting therapy with vedolizumab or an anti-TNF agent in 45 IBD centres across Germany. We excluded biologic-experienced patients and those with missing partial Mayo (pMayo) outcomes; this resulted in a final sample of 314 (182 on vedolizumab and 132 on an anti-TNF agent). The primary outcome was clinical remission measured using pMayo

Editorial: Is vedolizumab the preferred biologic therapy for biologic‐naïve patients with ulcerative colitis?

“…When considering this issue and integrating the findings of this study 6 with previous research, it can be concluded that vedolizumab is the preferred biologic therapy for biologic-naïve patients with UC.…”

“…The study by Bokemeyer et al 6 has added new real-world data regarding the effectiveness of vedolizumab. To date, this is the largest real-world study on this issue.…”

Effectiveness and safety of vedolizumab and infliximab in biologic‐naïve patients with moderate‐to‐severe ulcerative colitis: A multicenter, retrospective cohort study

“…Our results are consistent with those of a real‐world cohort study conducted by Allamneni et al 18 Moreover, a retrospective cohort study in elder individuals (aged >60 years) with UC also found that the clinical remission rates at the 3‐, 6‐, and 12‐month intervals after treatment with VDZ or IFX were similar 19 . In addition, a recent prospective head‐to‐head real‐world study yielded no clear evidence favoring the efficacy of one therapeutic class over the other in induction therapy for UC 20 . Consequently, for patients diagnosed with moderate‐to‐severe UC, both biologics can achieve good steroid‐free clinical remission and clinical remission.…”

“…19 In addition, a recent prospective head-to-head real-world study yielded no clear evidence favoring the efficacy of one therapeutic class over the other in induction therapy for UC. 20 Consequently, for patients diagnosed with moderate-to-severe UC, both biologics can achieve good steroid-free clinical remission and clinical remission.…”