Comparative Efficacy of Infliximab Versus Tofacitinib for Inducing Remission in Biologic Naive Ulcerative Colitis: A Propensity Matched Study
Journal Articles
Overview
Research
Identity
Additional Document Info
View All
Overview
abstract
OBJECTIVE: In the absence of head-to-head clinical trials, indirect comparative studies are needed to help position therapies in ulcerative colitis (UC). We aimed to compare the efficacy of infliximab vs. tofacitinib for moderate-severe UC among biologic-naïve participants at post-induction. METHODS: This was a post-hoc analysis of patient-level data from four clinical trials including 659 biologic-naïve UC participants. We compared proportions of patients achieving week 8 clinical remission (CR), endoscopic improvement, and endoscopic remission. Clinical response at week 2 was also assessed. Multiple logistic regression models were adjusted for potential confounders identified as having an association with the outcome of interest on univariate analysis. Propensity scores were calculated to create a cohort of participants with similar distribution of baseline co-variates. RESULTS: Patients treated with infliximab had significantly greater odds of CR at week 8 compared to tofacitinib [88/242 (36.4%) vs. 100/417 (24.0%), aOR: 1.65 (95% CI 1.11-2.44), p = 0.013]. Endoscopic improvement at week 8 was also significantly greater among infliximab-treated patients [149/242 (61.6%) vs. 159/417 (38.1%), aOR: 2.12 (95% CI 1.45-3.10), p < 0.001]. Similar findings were observed with week 8 endoscopic remission [61/242 (25.2%) vs. 43/417 (10.3%); aOR: 2.72 (95% CI 1.66-4.46), p < 0.001]. A similar proportion of participants attained clinical response at week 2 [205/242 (84.7%) vs. 334/417 (80.1%), aOR: 1.48 (95% CI 0.93-2.37), p = 0.101]. Similar results were observed among the propensity score matched cohort. CONCLUSION: Based on the efficacy observed in this post-hoc analysis, consideration should be given to use of infliximab over tofacitinib for treatment of moderate to severe biologic-naïve UC. However, baseline characteristic mismatches persisted despite propensity score matching, and further studies are needed to confirm our findings.
