Abstract
Abstract
Background
Ustekinumab is a monoclonal antibody against the p40 subunit of IL-12 and IL23 which has been proven efficacious and safe in clinical trials, yet, real-word effectiveness studies are lacking. We aimed to determine the effectiveness and safety of ustekinumab in Crohn’s disease patients in a usual care setting, as well as to identify factors that predict response to treatment.
Methods
This was a retrospective review of patients with Crohn’s disease who had received ustekinumab at McMaster University Medical Center between January 2017 and August 2019. The primary endpoints were 12-month rates of clinical response, clinical remission and endoscopic improvement (according to physician assessment). We also performed a multivariate logistic regression to determine independent predictors of treatment effectiveness. Key safety outcomes were rates of adverse events including infections.
Results
We included 123 patients with Crohn’s disease, 58.8% of which had ileocolonic disease. Of these patients, 79.5% had prior TNF-antagonist exposure and 17.1% had previously used vedolizumab. The 12-month rate of clinical response, clinical remission, and endoscopic improvement, were 88%, 35%, and 47% respectively. On univariable analyses, longer disease duration was associated with a lower likelihood of achieving endoscopic improvement (OR 0.91 per year of disease duration, 95% CI 0.84–0.99, p = 0.03). On multivariate logistic regression, concomitant steroid use (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.12–0.99, p = 0.049) and previous vedolizumab exposure (OR 0.13, 95% 0.02–0.77) were significantly associated with less likelihood of achieving clinical response at 12 months. Adverse events occurred in 13% of patients and infections occurred in only 1% of patients.
Conclusion
Ustekinumab has been effective in our real-world experience at achieving clinical response, clinical remission and endoscopic improvement in patients with Crohn’s disease. We found that concomitant steroid use and prior vedolizumab exposure were associated with a lower likelihood of clinical response. Further prospective data are needed to understand whether these are truly predictors of lack of response, or represent confounding from patients with more refractory disease.