BACKGROUND: While indirect comparison of infliximab (IFX) and vedolizumab (VDZ) in adults with Crohn's disease (CD) or ulcerative colitis (UC) shows that IFX has better effectiveness during induction, and comparable efficacy during maintenance treatment, comparative data specific to subcutaneous (SC) IFX (i.e., CT-P13 SC) versus VDZ are limited. AIM: Pooled analysis of randomised studies to compare efficacy and safety with IFX SC and VDZ in moderate-to-severe inflammatory bowel disease. METHODS: Parallel-group, randomised studies evaluating IFX SC and VDZ in patients with moderate-to-severe CD or UC were identified. Eligible studies reported ≥ 1 prespecified outcome of interest at Week 6 (reflecting treatment during the induction phase) and/or at 1 year (Weeks 50-54; reflecting treatment during the maintenance phase). Prespecified efficacy and safety outcomes considered in this pooled analysis included the proportions of patients achieving disease-specific clinical responses, clinical remission, or discontinuing due to lack of efficacy, and the proportions of patients experiencing adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, infections, serious infections, or discontinuing due to AEs. Data from multiple studies or study arms were extracted and pooled using a random-effect model; comparative analyses were performed separately for patients with CD and UC. RESULTS: We identified three eligible CD trials and four eligible UC trials that assigned over 1200 participants per disease cohort to either IFX SC or VDZ. In patients with CD, intravenous induction therapy with IFX demonstrated better efficacy (non-overlapping 95% confidence intervals [CIs]) compared with VDZ; during the maintenance phase, IFX SC showed numerically better efficacy (overlapping 95% CIs) than VDZ. A lower proportion of IFX SC-treated patients discontinued therapy due to lack of efficacy over 1 year. In patients with UC, efficacy profiles were similar with IFX SC and VDZ during the induction and maintenance phases, and a lower proportion of IFX SC-treated patients discontinued therapy due to lack of efficacy over 1 year. In both cohorts, safety profiles for IFX SC and VDZ were generally comparable during 1 year. CONCLUSION: IFX SC demonstrated better efficacy than VDZ in patients with CD, and similar efficacy to VDZ in patients with UC; 1-year safety was comparable with IFX SC and VDZ.

• Klíčová slova
• Biobetter, Bioinnovative, Inflammatory bowel disease, Subcutaneous infliximab, Tumour necrosis factor-α inhibitors, Vedolizumab,
• MeSH
• Crohnova nemoc * farmakoterapie   MeSH
• dospělí MeSH
• gastrointestinální látky * terapeutické užití   škodlivé účinky   aplikace a dávkování   MeSH
• humanizované monoklonální protilátky * terapeutické užití   škodlivé účinky   aplikace a dávkování   MeSH
• indukce remise MeSH
• indukční chemoterapie metody   MeSH
• infliximab * terapeutické užití   aplikace a dávkování   škodlivé účinky   MeSH
• injekce subkutánní MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• randomizované kontrolované studie jako téma MeSH
• ulcerózní kolitida * farmakoterapie   MeSH
• výsledek terapie MeSH
• Check Tag
• dospělí MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH
• srovnávací studie MeSH
• Názvy látek
• gastrointestinální látky * MeSH
• humanizované monoklonální protilátky * MeSH
• infliximab * MeSH
• vedolizumab MeSH Prohlížeč

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: There are limited comparative data for infliximab and vedolizumab in inflammatory bowel disease patients. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of infliximab and vedolizumab in adult patients with moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis. RESULTS: We identified six eligible Crohn's disease and seven eligible ulcerative colitis trials that randomised over 1900 participants per disease cohort to infliximab or vedolizumab. In the Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis cohorts, infliximab yielded better efficacy than vedolizumab for all analysed outcomes (CDAI-70, CDAI-100 responses, and clinical remission for Crohn's disease and clinical response and clinical remission for ulcerative colitis) during the induction phase, with non-overlapping 95% confidence intervals. In the maintenance phase, similar proportions of infliximab- or vedolizumab-treated patients achieved clinical response, clinical remission, or mucosal healing in both Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis. For the safety outcomes, rates of adverse events, serious adverse events, and discontinuations due to adverse events were similar in infliximab- and vedolizumab-treated patients in both diseases. The infection rate was higher in infliximab for Crohn's disease and higher in vedolizumab when treating patients with ulcerative colitis. There was no difference between the treatments in the proportions of patients who reported serious infections in both indications. CONCLUSIONS: Indirect comparison of infliximab and vedolizumab trials in adult patients with moderate-to severe Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis demonstrated that infliximab has better efficacy in the induction phase and comparable efficacy during the maintenance phase and overall safety profile compared to vedolizumab.

• Klíčová slova
• Antibodies, Biological therapy, Crohn’s disease, IBD, Monoclonal, Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha, Ulcerative colitis,
• MeSH
• Crohnova nemoc * chemicky indukované   farmakoterapie   MeSH
• dospělí MeSH
• gastrointestinální látky škodlivé účinky   MeSH
• humanizované monoklonální protilátky MeSH
• idiopatické střevní záněty * chemicky indukované   farmakoterapie   MeSH
• infliximab škodlivé účinky   MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• ulcerózní kolitida * chemicky indukované   farmakoterapie   MeSH
• Check Tag
• dospělí MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH
• metaanalýza MeSH
• systematický přehled MeSH
• Názvy látek
• gastrointestinální látky MeSH
• humanizované monoklonální protilátky MeSH
• infliximab MeSH
• vedolizumab MeSH Prohlížeč

BACKGROUND: Faecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) is an emerging treatment modality, but its current clinical use and organisation are unknown. We aimed to describe the clinical use, conduct, and potential for FMT in Europe. METHODS: We invited all hospital-based FMT centres within the European Council member states to answer a web-based questionnaire covering their clinical activities, organisation, and regulation of FMT in 2019. Responders were identified from trials registered at clinicaltrials.gov and from the United European Gastroenterology (UEG) working group for stool banking and FMT. FINDINGS: In 2019, 31 FMT centres from 17 countries reported a total of 1,874 (median 25, quartile 10-64) FMT procedures; 1,077 (57%) with Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) as indication, 791 (42%) with experimental indications, and 6 (0•3%) unaccounted for. Adjusted to population size, 0•257 per 100,000 population received FMT for CDI and 0•189 per 100,000 population for experimental indications. With estimated 12,400 (6,100-28,500) annual cases of multiple, recurrent CDI and indication for FMT in Europe, the current European FMT activity covers approximately 10% of the patients with indication. The participating centres demonstrated high safety standards and adherence to international consensus guidelines. Formal or informal regulation from health authorities was present at 21 (68%) centres. INTERPRETATION: FMT is a widespread routine treatment for multiple, recurrent CDI and an experimental treatment. Embedded within hospital settings, FMT centres operate with high standards across Europe to provide safe FMT. A significant gap in FMT coverage suggests the need to raise clinical awareness and increase the FMT activity in Europe by at least 10-fold to meet the true, indicated need. FUNDING: NordForsk under the Nordic Council and Innovation Fund Denmark (j.no. 8056-00006B).

• Klíčová slova
• Abbreviations: CDI, Clostridioides difficile infection, Clostridioides difficile, ECDC, European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, FMT, FMT, Faecal microbiota transplantation, Faecal microbiota transplantation, IQR, Interquartile range, REDCap, Research Data Capture software, SARS-CoV-2, Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, Stool banking, UEG, United Gastroenterology European,
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH