Cure8 research brief
Why This Matters
This large real‑world comparison helps show how different advanced therapies performed over 1 year in routine practice, highlighting that ustekinumab had strong outcomes overall while upadacitinib was most effective in patients with prior biologic exposure.
That information may be relevant when choosing or sequencing therapies.
Who Should Pay Attention
Clinicians, researchers, adult patients considering biologic/JAK therapy, and patients already on biologics
Study Snapshot
What To Know
This study pooled real‑world data from 1,406 UC patients treated between 2014 and 2024 and examined a strict primary outcome: continuous, steroid‑free clinical remission at 1 year without drug optimization, additional therapy, or AE‑driven discontinuation.
The drugs compared were infliximab, adalimumab, golimumab (anti‑TNFs), vedolizumab (anti‑integrin), ustekinumab (IL‑12/23 inhibitor), and the JAK inhibitors tofacitinib and upadacitinib. Ustekinumab was reported as the most effective overall and in bio‑naive patients, with the lowest adverse event rates.
Upadacitinib showed the highest efficacy among bio‑exposed (previously treated) patients and as later‑line therapy, but had higher adverse event rates; however, treatment withdrawal remained low. These findings come from an observational cohort and reflect real‑world use and practice patterns rather than randomized assignment.
Keep In Mind
Observational design and possible residual confounding limit causal conclusions; the primary endpoint required continuous, steroid‑free remission without optimization, which is a strict real‑world measure.
Source Details
Review the original publication for the complete reporting, methods, and context.
This Cure8 brief is based on source text from the linked article. Cure8 is informational only and is not a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment.