S1107 Comparative Outcomes in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Inflammatory Bowel Disease With and Without Concurrent Eosinophilic Esophagitis: A Propensity-Matched Cohort Study
S1104 Updated Epidemiological Insights on the Association Between Eosinophilic Esophagitis and Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A United States Population-Based Cohort Study
INTRODUCTION: There are limited real-world data comparing the effectiveness of upadacitinib and tofacitinib in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using TriNetX, a multi-institutional database, to compare the effectiveness of upadacitinib and tofacitinib in patients with UC. The primary aim was to assess the risk of a composite outcome of hospitalization requiring intravenous steroids and/or colectomy within 6 and 12 months. One-to-one propensity score matching was performed for demographics, comorbid conditions, mean hemoglobin, C-reactive protein, albumin, and calprotectin, and prior UC medications including recent oral or intravenous steroid use between the cohorts. Risk was expressed as adjusted odds ratio (aOR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: There were 526 patients in the upadacitinib cohort (mean age 40.4 ± 16.3, 44.8% female sex, 76.6% White race) and 1,149 patients in the tofacitinib cohort (mean age 42 ± 17.1, 41.9% female sex, 76% White race). After propensity score matching, there was no significant difference in the risk of the composite outcome of need for intravenous steroids and/or colectomy within 6 months (aOR 0.75, 95% CI 0.49–1.09). However, there was a lower risk of the composite outcome (aOR 0.63, 95% CI 0.44–0.89) in the upadacitinib cohort compared with the tofacitinib cohort within 12 months. There was no difference in the risk of intravenous steroid use (aOR 0.70, 95% CI 0.48–1.02) but lower risk of colectomy (aOR 0.46, 95% CI 0.27–0.79). In sensitivity analysis, there was also a lower risk of the composite outcome (aOR 0.64, 95% CI 0.44–0.94), including lower risk of intravenous steroid use (aOR 0.67, 95% CI 0.45–0.99) and colectomy (aOR 0.49, 95% CI 0.26–0.92) in the upadacitinib cohort compared with the tofacitinib cohort within 12 months. DISCUSSION: This study utilizing real-world data showed that upadacitinib was associated with improved disease-specific outcomes at 12 months compared with tofacitinib in patients with UC.
Effectiveness and Safety of Semaglutide for Weight Loss in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease and Obesity
Abstract Background Semaglutide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist, has shown sustained and clinically significant weight loss in the general population. There are limited data on outcomes of its use in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Methods A retrospective cohort study was conducted between June 4, 2021, and December 11, 2023, using TriNetX, a U.S. multi-institutional database in patients with obesity who had IBD compared with patients without IBD. The primary aim was to assess the mean total body weight (TBW) change between 6 and 15 months from initiation of semaglutide compared with baseline between the 2 cohorts. One-to-one (1:1) propensity score matching was performed for demographics, comorbid conditions, smoking status, and mean body mass index. A 2-sample t test was performed to assess mean TBW change from baseline, with a P value <.05 considered to be statistically significant. We also compared the risk of IBD-specific outcomes with and without semaglutide use in patients with IBD. Results Out of 47 424 patients with IBD and obesity, 150 (0.3%) patients were prescribed semaglutide (mean age 47.4 ± 12.2 years; mean TBW 237 ± 54.8 pounds; mean body mass index 36.9 ± 6.5 kg/m2; 66% Crohn’s disease). There was no difference in mean TBW change after initiation of semaglutide in the IBD and non-IBD cohorts (−16 ± 13.4 pounds vs −18 ± 12.7 pounds; P = .24). There was no difference in mean TBW change between 6 and 12 months (−16 ± 13 pounds vs −15 ± 11.2 pounds; P = .24) and 12 and 15 months (−20 ± 13.2 pounds vs −21 ± 15.3 pounds; P = .49) between the 2 cohorts. There was no difference in the risk of oral or intravenous steroid use and any-cause hospitalization in the semaglutide group compared with the group without semaglutide use in patients with IBD. Conclusion Semaglutide use is effective in patients with IBD and obesity similar to patients without IBD, with >5% mean weight loss. There was no increased risk of IBD-specific adverse events with semaglutide use.