Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10553/127335
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLópez-Sanromán, Aen_US
dc.contributor.authorVera-Mendoza, Ien_US
dc.contributor.authorDomènech, Een_US
dc.contributor.authorTaxonera, Cen_US
dc.contributor.authorRuiz, VVen_US
dc.contributor.authorMarín-Jiménez, Ien_US
dc.contributor.authorGuardiola, Jen_US
dc.contributor.authorCastro, Len_US
dc.contributor.authorEsteve, Men_US
dc.contributor.authorIglesias, Een_US
dc.contributor.authorCeballos Santos, Daniel Sebastiánen_US
dc.contributor.authorMartínez-Montiel, Pen_US
dc.contributor.authorGisbert, JPen_US
dc.contributor.authorMínguez, Men_US
dc.contributor.authorEcharri, Aen_US
dc.contributor.authorCalvet, Xen_US
dc.contributor.authorBarrio, Jen_US
dc.contributor.authorHinojosa, Jen_US
dc.contributor.authorMartín-Arranz, MDen_US
dc.contributor.authorMárquez-Mosquera, Len_US
dc.contributor.authorBermejo, Fen_US
dc.contributor.authorRimola, Jen_US
dc.contributor.authorPons, Ven_US
dc.contributor.authorNos, Pen_US
dc.date.accessioned2023-10-20T13:10:51Z-
dc.date.available2023-10-20T13:10:51Z-
dc.date.issued2017en_US
dc.identifier.issn1873-9946en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10553/127335-
dc.description.abstractBackground and Aims: Postoperative recurrence of Crohn's disease [POR-CD] is almost certain if no prophylaxis is administered. Evidence for optimal treatment is lacking. Our aim was to compare the efficacy of adalimumab [ADA] and azathioprine [AZA] in this setting. Methods: We performed a phase 3, 52-week, multicentre, randomised, superiority study [APPRECIA], in which patients with ileocolonic resection were randomised either to ADA 160-80-40 mg subcutaneously [SC] or AZA 2.5 mg/kg/day, both associated with metronidazole. The primary endpoint was endoscopic recurrence at 1 year [Rutgeerts i2b, i3, i4], as evaluated by a blinded central reader. Results: We recruited 91 patients [median age 35.0 years, disease duration 6.0 years, 23.8% smokers, 7.1% previous resections]. The study drugs were administered to 84 patients. Treatment was discontinued owing to adverse events in 11 patients [13.1%]. Discontinuation was significantly less frequent in the ADA [4.4%] than in the AZA group [23.2%] (dif.: 18.6% [95% CI 4.1-33.2], p = 0.011). According to the intention-to-treat analysis, therapy failed in 23/39 patients in the AZA group [59%] and 19/45 patients in the ADA group [42.2%] [p = 0.12]. In the per-protocol analysis [61 patients with centrally evaluable images], recurrence was recorded in 8/24 [33.3%] patients in the AZA and 11/37 [29.7%] in the ADA group [p = 0.76]. No statistically significant differences between the groups were found for recurrence in magnetic resonance images, biological markers of activity, surgical procedures, or hospital admissions. Conclusions: ADA has not demonstrated a better efficacy than AZA [both associated with metronidazole] for prophylaxis of POR-CD in an unselected population, although tolerance to ADA is significantly better.en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Crohn's and Colitisen_US
dc.sourceJournal of Crohn's and Colitis [1873-9946], v. 11(11), pp. 1293-1301 (Octubre 2017)en_US
dc.subject32 Ciencias médicasen_US
dc.subject3205 Medicina internaen_US
dc.subject3208 Farmacodinámicaen_US
dc.subject.otherCrohn's diseaseen_US
dc.subject.otherAzathioprineen_US
dc.subject.otherAdalimumaben_US
dc.titleAdalimumab vs Azathioprine in the Prevention of Postoperative Crohn's Disease Recurrence. A GETECCU Randomised Trialen_US
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/Articleen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjx051en_US
dc.identifier.pmid28402454-
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85033383027-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000416121200002-
dc.contributor.orcid#NODATA#-
dc.contributor.orcid#NODATA#-
dc.contributor.orcid#NODATA#-
dc.contributor.orcid#NODATA#-
dc.contributor.orcid#NODATA#-
dc.contributor.orcid#NODATA#-
dc.contributor.orcid#NODATA#-
dc.contributor.orcid#NODATA#-
dc.contributor.orcid#NODATA#-
dc.contributor.orcid#NODATA#-
dc.contributor.orcid#NODATA#-
dc.contributor.orcid#NODATA#-
dc.contributor.orcid#NODATA#-
dc.contributor.orcid#NODATA#-
dc.contributor.orcid#NODATA#-
dc.contributor.orcid#NODATA#-
dc.contributor.orcid#NODATA#-
dc.contributor.orcid#NODATA#-
dc.contributor.orcid#NODATA#-
dc.contributor.orcid#NODATA#-
dc.contributor.orcid#NODATA#-
dc.contributor.orcid#NODATA#-
dc.contributor.orcid#NODATA#-
dc.description.lastpage1301en_US
dc.identifier.issue11-
dc.description.firstpage1293en_US
dc.relation.volume11en_US
dc.investigacionCiencias de la Saluden_US
dc.type2Artículoen_US
dc.description.numberofpages9en_US
dc.utils.revisionen_US
dc.date.coverdateOctubre 2017en_US
dc.identifier.ulpgcen_US
dc.contributor.buulpgcBU-MEDen_US
dc.description.sjr2,728
dc.description.jcr6,637
dc.description.sjrqQ1
dc.description.jcrqQ1
dc.description.scieSCIE
item.grantfulltextnone-
item.fulltextSin texto completo-
crisitem.author.deptDepartamento de Ciencias Médicas y Quirúrgicas-
crisitem.author.orcid0000-0003-2384-4524-
crisitem.author.fullNameCeballos Santos, Daniel Sebastián-
Appears in Collections:Artículos
Show simple item record

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

61
checked on Nov 17, 2024

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

55
checked on Nov 17, 2024

Page view(s)

34
checked on May 18, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Share



Export metadata



Items in accedaCRIS are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.