{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.030922142462727776, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01601325234676974, 'mean_word_length': 4.98019801980198, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Direct retrospective comparison of adalimumab and infliximab in preventing early postoperative endoscopic recurrence after ileocaecal resection for crohn's disease: results from the MULTIPER database.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS
Both adalimumab [ADA] and infliximab [IFX] seem to be effective in the prevention of early postoperative endoscopic recurrence [EPER] after ileocaecal resection in Crohn's disease [CD] patients. There is lack of data with direct comparison between the two agents in the postoperative scenario. The aim of this study was to compare the rates of EPER in patients treated with ADA and IFX after ileocaecal resection for CD.


METHODS
This was a multicentre retrospective analysis of EPER rates in CD patients after ileocaecal resections, from seven referral centres in three countries. Endoscopic recurrence was defined as Rutgeerts' score ≥ i2. The patients were allocated according to treatment to two groups: ADA or IFX. The EPER rates were compared between the two treatment groups.


RESULTS
Among the 168 patients included in the database, 96 received anti-tumour necrosis factor [TNF] agents after resection [37 in the ADA and 59 in the IFX groups] and were included in this comparative study. The groups were comparable in all baseline characteristics, mainly age, gender, previous resections, perianal CD, and mono or combination therapy. EPER was identified in 9/37 [24.32%] in the ADA group vs 16/59 [27.12%] in the IFX group [p = 0.815].


CONCLUSIONS
In this retrospective direct comparison between ADA and IFX therapy after ileocaecal resection, there was no significant difference between the two anti-TNF agents in terms of EPER rates. However, prospective randomised studies are needed to confirm these data and better define the role of each agent in the prevention of EPER.