• LOGIN
    Login with username and password
Repository logo

BORIS Portal

Bern Open Repository and Information System

  • Publications
  • Theses
  • Research Data
  • Projects
  • Organizations
  • Researchers
  • More
  • Collections
  • Statistics
  • LOGIN
    Login with username and password
Repository logo
Unibern.ch
  1. Home
  2. Publications
  3. Comparative Efficacy of Mesalazine and Ozanimod following Induction Treatment in Mesalazine-Exposed Advanced Therapy-Naïve Adult Ulcerative Colitis Patients.
 

Comparative Efficacy of Mesalazine and Ozanimod following Induction Treatment in Mesalazine-Exposed Advanced Therapy-Naïve Adult Ulcerative Colitis Patients.

Options
  • Details
  • Files
Description
Geert D’Haens and Ekaterina Safroneeva should be considered joint
first authors.
BORIS DOI
10.48620/93196
Publisher DOI
10.1159/000548243
PubMed ID
41323524
Description
Introduction
Both mesalazine and ozanimod are oral treatment options for patients with moderately active ulcerative colitis (UC).Methods
Comparative analysis comparing efficacy endpoints of an 8-week non-inferiority induction study (TP0503) with 3.2 g/day mesalazine (n = 321) to the True North 10-week induction study of 1 mg/day ozanimod (n = 281). We compared the efficacy of oral mesalazine (Asacol) as monotherapy and ozanimod (Zeposia) as add-on therapy to mesalazine, without concomitant corticosteroids, following induction treatment in mesalazine-exposed but immunomodulator- and advanced therapy-naïve UC patients. Endpoints from the non-inferiority study were re-calculated using the definitions from the True North study.Results
The two cohorts had similar age (45 ± 14 years vs. 44 ± 13.5 years) and baseline disease severity (total Mayo score; 8.5 ± 0.8 vs. 8.6 ± 1.1) for mesalazine- and ozanimod-treated patients, respectively. No differences were observed in patients achieving clinical response (reduction from baseline in the 3-component Mayo score [sum of rectal bleeding subscore/RBS, stool frequency subscore/SFS, and Mayo endoscopic score/MES) of ≥2 points and ≥35%, and a reduction from baseline in the RBS of ≥1 point or an absolute RBS ≤1} (58% vs. 58%; p = 0.917) and clinical remission (RBS = 0, SFS ≤1 [and decreases of ≥1 point from baseline SFS], and MES ≤1) (22% vs. 28%; p = 0.074) treated with mesalazine (at 8 weeks) and ozanimod (at 10 weeks), respectively. A higher percentage of patients treated with ozanimod achieved endoscopic improvement (MES ≤1 without friability) compared to mesalazine (38% vs. 29%, p = 0.018).Conclusion
Among individuals previously exposed to mesalazine, a similar effect on clinical efficacy was observed between patients treated with mesalazine and those treated with ozanimod.
Date of Publication
2025-09-15
Publication Type
Article
Subject(s)
600 Technology > 610 Medicine & health
300 Social sciences, sociology & anthropology > 360 Social problems & social services
Keyword(s)
Comparative efficacy
•
Mesalazine
•
Ozanimod
Language(s)
en
Contributor(s)
D'Haens, Geert
Safroneeva, Ekaterina
Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine
Peyrin-Biroulet, Laurent
Danese, Silvio
Jairath, Vipul
Thorne, Helen
Laoun, Raphaël
Additional Credits
Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine
Series
Inflammatory Intestinal Diseases
Publisher
Karger Publishers
ISSN
2296-9365
2296-9403
Access(Rights)
open.access
Show full item
BORIS Portal
Bern Open Repository and Information System
Build: dd892c [ 9.04. 8:30]
Explore
  • Projects
  • Funding
  • Publications
  • Research Data
  • Organizations
  • Researchers
  • Audiovisual Material
  • Software & other digital items
  • Events
More
  • About BORIS Portal
  • Send Feedback
  • Cookie settings
  • Service Policy
Follow us on
  • Mastodon
  • YouTube
  • LinkedIn
UniBe logo