ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Data on ustekinumab and vedolizumab in the elderly inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) population are limited. The aim of the current study was to assess the safety and effectiveness of both in an elderly real-life population. METHODS: A multicentric retrospective study was performed on IBD patients who started vedolizumab or ustekinumab between 2010 and 2020. Clinical and endoscopic remission rates and (serious) adverse events (AE) were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 911 IBD patients were included, with 171 (19%) aged above 60 (111 VDZ, 60 UST). Elderly patients treated with vedolizumab or ustekinumab had an increased risk for non-IBD hospitalization (10.5% vs. 5.7%, p = 0.021) and malignancy (2.3% vs. 0.5%, p = 0.045) compared to the younger population. Corticosteroid-free clinical (50% vs. 44%; p = 0.201) and endoscopic remission rates (47.9% vs. 31%, p = 0.07) at 1 year were similar. Comparing vedolizumab to ustekinumab in the elderly population, corticosteroid-free (47.9% vs. 31%, p = 0.061) and endoscopic remission rates (66.7% vs. 64.4%, p = 0.981) were similar. Vedolizumab- and ustekinumab-treated patients had comparable infection rates (13.5% vs. 10.0%, p = 0.504), IBD flare-ups (4.5% vs. 5%, p = 1.000), the occurrence of new EIMs (13.5% vs. 10%, p = 0.504), a risk of intestinal surgery (5.4% vs. 6.7%, p = 0.742), malignancy (1.8% vs. 3.3%, p = 0.613), hospitalization (9.9% vs. 11.7%, p = 0.721), and mortality (0.9% vs. 1.7%, p = 1.000). AE risk was associated only with corticosteroid use. CONCLUSIONS: Ustekinumab and vedolizumab show comparable effectiveness and safety in the elderly IBD population. Elderly IBD patients have an increased risk for non-IBD hospitalizations and malignancy compared to the younger IBD population, with corticosteroid use as the main risk factor.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Extra-intestinal manifestations are frequently reported in inflammatory bowel diseases. However, data comparing the effect of vedolizumab and ustekinumab on articular extra-intestinal manifestations are limited. The aim here was to evaluate differences in new-onset and the evolution of pre-existing joint extra-intestinal manifestations during both treatments. METHODS: An international multicentre retrospective study was performed on inflammatory bowel disease patients who started vedolizumab or ustekinumab between May 2010 and December 2020. Extra-intestinal manifestations were assessed at baseline and joint extra-intestinal manifestations were evaluated throughout the 2-year follow-up. Arthropathy was defined by joint inflammation [arthritis/sacroiliitis], diagnosed by a rheumatologist, and arthralgia as articular pain without confirmed inflammation. Additionally, skin, ocular and hepatic extra-intestinal manifestations were assessed at baseline. Uni- and multivariate analyses were performed. RESULTS: In total, 911 patients [vedolizumab: 584; ustekinumab: 327] were included. Deterioration of pre-existing arthropathy and rate of new-onset arthropathy were not significantly associated with vedolizumab over ustekinumab. Arthropathy was used as reason to stop treatment in six vedolizumab and two ustekinumab patients. The odds of developing new arthralgia within 6 months was higher in patients who took vedolizumab compared to ustekinumab (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 2.28 [1.01-5.15], p = 0.047). However, this effect was not sustained during the 2-year follow-up (aOR: 1.35 [0.80-2.29], p = 0.259). Deterioration of pre-existing arthralgia was comparable between ustekinumab and vedolizumab-treated patients. In two vedolizumab-treated patients arthralgia was given as the reason to stop treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Vedolizumab and ustekinumab can be used safely in patients with articular extra-intestinal manifestations. Only a temporary increased risk for developing arthralgia has been observed under vedolizumab.
