We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative effectiveness of tacrolimus and infliximab in hospitalized patients with ulcerative colitis.
Clinical and Translational Gastroenterology 2023 September 28
INTRODUCTION: Cyclosporine or infliximab (IFX) have been used to avoid surgery in patients with severe refractory ulcerative colitis (UC). Tacrolimus (Tac) is occasionally used as an alternative to cyclosporine; however, the comparative efficacy of Tac and IFX has not been reported. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of Tac and IFX in hospitalized UC patients.
METHODS: In a propensity score (PS)-matched cohort derived from a large nationwide database, 4-year effectiveness was compared between patients initiated on Tac or IFX. The primary outcome was the colectomy rate during the index hospitalization. We also analyzed the cumulative medication discontinuation, UC-related re-hospitalization, and colectomy rates after discharge.
RESULTS: Among 29,239 hospitalized patients, 4,565 were extracted for eligibility, of whom 2,170 were treated with Tac and the remaining 2,395 with IFX. After PS matching, 1,787 patients were selected for each group. During the index hospitalization, excluding patients who switched to another molecular-targeted agent, the colectomy rate was higher in the Tac group than the IFX group (7.8% vs 4.2%, P <0.01). Among patients discharged without colectomy, the cumulative medication discontinuation (28.4% vs 17.1%, P <0.01) and re-hospitalization (22.4% vs 15.4%, P <0.01) rates were higher in the Tac group than the IFX group; however, there was no difference in the cumulative colectomy rate (3.3% vs 2.7%).
CONCLUSIONS: Although Tac and IFX were effective for avoiding surgery in hospitalized UC patients, IFX was more effective than Tac. IFX also had higher long-term effectiveness. Future prospective studies comparing the efficacy of Tac and IFX is warranted.
METHODS: In a propensity score (PS)-matched cohort derived from a large nationwide database, 4-year effectiveness was compared between patients initiated on Tac or IFX. The primary outcome was the colectomy rate during the index hospitalization. We also analyzed the cumulative medication discontinuation, UC-related re-hospitalization, and colectomy rates after discharge.
RESULTS: Among 29,239 hospitalized patients, 4,565 were extracted for eligibility, of whom 2,170 were treated with Tac and the remaining 2,395 with IFX. After PS matching, 1,787 patients were selected for each group. During the index hospitalization, excluding patients who switched to another molecular-targeted agent, the colectomy rate was higher in the Tac group than the IFX group (7.8% vs 4.2%, P <0.01). Among patients discharged without colectomy, the cumulative medication discontinuation (28.4% vs 17.1%, P <0.01) and re-hospitalization (22.4% vs 15.4%, P <0.01) rates were higher in the Tac group than the IFX group; however, there was no difference in the cumulative colectomy rate (3.3% vs 2.7%).
CONCLUSIONS: Although Tac and IFX were effective for avoiding surgery in hospitalized UC patients, IFX was more effective than Tac. IFX also had higher long-term effectiveness. Future prospective studies comparing the efficacy of Tac and IFX is warranted.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System: From History to Practice of a Secular Topic.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 5
Albumin: a comprehensive review and practical guideline for clinical use.European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 2024 April 13
Revascularization Strategy in Myocardial Infarction with Multivessel Disease.Journal of Clinical Medicine 2024 March 27
Clinical practice guidelines on the management of status epilepticus in adults: A systematic review.Epilepsia 2024 April 13
Interstitial Lung Disease: A Review.JAMA 2024 April 23
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app