Hôpital Saint Joseph

Vedolizumab has become the preferred first-line advanced therapy in ulcerative colitis (UC). However, the optimal second-line treatment following vedolizumab failure remains unclear. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of second-line therapies after first-line vedolizumab. We conducted a multicenter retrospective study including UC patients from 31 centers who received infliximab (IFX), subcutaneous (SC) anti-TNFs, or ustekinumab after vedolizumab failure. The primary endpoint was steroid-free clinical remission (SFCR) at week 14. Predictors of remission were identified using multivariate logistic regression. Among 196 patients, 99 received IFX, 27 anti-TNF SC, and 70 ustekinumab. At week 14, SFCR was achieved in 78 patients (39.8%): 38 (38.4%) with IFX, 8 (29.6%) with anti-TNF SC, and 32 (45.7%) with ustekinumab, with no significant difference between groups (p=0.32). Median treatment persistence ranged from 8 to 9.2months. Baseline corticosteroid use was associated with lower odds of SFCR (OR=0.37, 95% CI [0.18-0.73]). Adverse events occurred in 15.8% of patients, including 12.2% serious events. Overall adverse events were less frequent with ustekinumab than with IFX (10.0% vs. 24.2%, p=0.02), while serious events were comparable (5.7% vs. 16.1%, p=0.08). Discontinuation due to adverse events was more frequent with IFX (12.1%) and anti-TNF SC (14.8%) than with ustekinumab (2.9%, p=0.045 and 0.049). In UC patients failing vedolizumab, second-line IFX, anti-TNF SC, and ustekinumab showed similar effectiveness and persistence. Infliximab remains a robust option for rapid control in high inflammatory burden, whereas ustekinumab may be preferred for its superior safety profile in high-risk patients.

Data are needed on the effect of oxygen delivered through a high-flow nasal cannula, as compared with standard oxygen therapy, on intubation and mortality in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. In this multicenter, open-label trial, we randomly assigned patients who had acute hypoxemic respiratory failure to receive high-flow-oxygen or standard-oxygen therapy. All the patients had a ratio of the partial pressure of arterial oxygen to the fraction of inspired oxygen of 200 or less, a respiratory rate of more than 25 breaths per minute, and pulmonary infiltrate on chest imaging. The primary outcome was death by day 28. A total of 1116 patients underwent randomization. Of these patients, 1110 (556 in the high-flow-oxygen group and 554 in the standard-oxygen group) were included in the analysis. Mortality at day 28 was 14.6% (in 81 of 556 patients) in the high-flow-oxygen group and 14.6% (in 81 of 554 patients) in the standard-oxygen group (difference, -0.05 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -4.21 to 4.10; P = 0.98). The incidence of intubation by day 28 was 42.4% (in 236 of 556 patients) in the high-flow-oxygen group and 48.4% (in 268 of 554 patients) in the standard-oxygen group (difference, -5.93 percentage points; 95% CI, -11.78 to -0.08). Serious adverse events (cardiac arrest or pneumothorax) occurred during spontaneous breathing in 13 patients (2.3%) in the high-flow-oxygen group and in 6 patients (1.1%) in the standard-oxygen group. Among patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure, the use of oxygen delivered through a high-flow nasal cannula did not significantly reduce mortality at day 28. (Funded by the French Ministry of Health and Fisher and Paykel Healthcare; SOHO ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04468126.).