Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Background and Aim: Newer biologics appeared safer in landmark clinical trials, but their safety is understudied in vulnerable populations. The aim of the present study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the safety of available biologicals in the elderly IBD population. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed/Medline and conference proceedings between 1 April 1969 and 1 June 2021 to identify eligible studies that examined the safety of biologics in elderly patients with IBD. Of the 2885 articles and 12 congress abstracts identified, 12 peer reviewed papers and 3 abstracts were included after independent evaluation by two reviewers. The identified studies collected safety data on anti-TNF, vedolizumab (VDZ) and ustekinumab (UST). Results: Rates of AE and infections were not different among the biologics (AE mean rate: 11.3 (CI 95% 9.9–12.7)/100 pts-years; p = 0.11, infection mean rate: 9.5 (CI 95% 8.4–10.6)/100 pts-years; p = 0.56) in elderly IBD patients on anti-TNF, VDZ or UST. Infusion/injection reaction rates were more common on anti-TNFs (mean rate: 2.51 (CI 95% 1.7–3.4/100 pts-years; p = 0.02). and malignancy rates were higher on VDZ/UST (mean rate: 2.14 (CI 95% 1.6–2.8)/100 pts-years; p = 0.01). Conclusions: Rates of AEs and infections were not different among biologicals. Infusion/injection reactions were more common on anti-TNFs. Current data are insufficient to suggest the sequencing of biologicals in elderly patients based on safety.
Hahn et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: