Biological agents in the treatment of Crohn's disease: a propensity score-matched analysis from the prospective Persistence Australian National IBD Cohort (PANIC3) study

John David Chetwood,Yanna Ko,Aviv Pudipeddi,Viraj Kariyawasam,Sudarshan Paramsothy,Rupert W Leong
DOI: https://doi.org/10.14309/ajg.0000000000002679
2024-01-27
The American Journal of Gastroenterology
Abstract:Background: Comparative effectiveness research provides data on the relative benefits and risks between treatments. In Crohn's disease, however, there are few head-to-head studies comparing advanced therapies and none with long-term follow-up. Real-world effectiveness, defined by treatment persistence, obtained from prospective population-based patient cohorts may help determine the best sequencing and positioning of biological agents. Methods: We analysed the prospectively-collected population-based Australian national Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme dispensing data registry (2005-2019) for CD. There is no mandated biological agent prescribing order and all citizens and permanent residents are eligible for treatment irrespective of insurance status. Propensity score matching was performed to reduce selection bias. Results: There were 2,029 lines of therapy in 1,446 patients (median age 43-years, IQR: 34-58, 44% males) over the 15-year period with 5,618 patient-years of follow-up. Per line of therapy, 915/2,029 (45.1%) patients used adalimumab, 722/2,029 (35.6%) used infliximab, 155/2,029 (7.6%) used vedolizumab, and 237/2,029 (11.7%) used ustekinumab. When used in biological agent-naïve patients, there was no difference in persistence between any agent (P>0.05). Used after first-line in biological agent-experienced CD, ustekinumab had significantly better persistence than non-ustekinumab biological agents (P=0.0018), versus both anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) alpha therapy (P=0.006) or vedolizumab (P<0.001). Ustekinumab persistence was unaffected by prior biological agent-exposure (P=0.51). After anti-TNF use, ustekinumab had superior persistence to an alternative anti-TNF agent (P=0.033) and to vedolizumab (P=0.026). Using a propensity score matched analysis adjusted for age, immunomodulator use and bio-exposed status, ustekinumab had superior persistence to anti-TNF (P=0.01). Multivariate predictors of worse persistence were use of a non-ustekinumab biological agent (adjusted hazard ratios (aHR): 2.10, P<0.001), and bio-experienced status (aHR: 1.23, P<0.001). Conclusion: This large national prospective database with non-hierarchical prescribing of biological agents did not identify superior persistence of any agent in bio-naïve CD. However, for bio-experienced CD patients, persistence was greater with ustekinumab.
gastroenterology & hepatology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?