Efficacy of ustekinumab versus advanced therapies for the treatment of moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Objective

:

To compare the relative efficacy of ustekinumab (UST) versus other therapies for 1-year response and remission rates in patients with moderate-severe UC. Methods

:

Randomised controlled trials reporting induction and maintenance efficacy of anti-TNFs (infliximab [IFX], adalimumab [ADA], golimumab [GOL]), vedolizumab (VDZ), tofacitinib (TOF) or UST were identified through a systematic literature review. Analyses were conducted for clinical response, clinical remission and endoscopic-mucosal healing for populations with and without failure of prior biologics (non-biologic failure, NBF; biologic failure, BF). Maintenance data from trials with re-randomised response designs were re-calculated to correspond to treat-through arms. Bayesian network meta-analyses (NMA) were conducted to obtain posterior distribution probabilities for UST to perform better than comparators. Results

:

Six trials included NBF patients and four included BF patients. In NBF patients, UST as a 1-year regimen showed higher probabilities of clinical response, remission and endoscopic-mucosal healing versus all treatments: Bayesian probabilities of UST being better than active therapies ranged from 91% (VDZ) to 100% (ADA) for response; 82% (VDZ) to 99% (ADA) for remission and 82% (IFX) to 100% (ADA and GOL) for endoscopic-mucosal healing. In BF patients, UST was the most effective treatment (Q8W dose); however, effect sizes were smaller than in the NBF population. Conclusions

:

Results indicate a higher likelihood of response, remission and endoscopic-mucosal healing at 1 year with UST versus comparators in the NBF population. In BF patients, a higher likelihood of response to UST versus most comparators was also observed, although results were more uncertain.