Persistence on Anti-Tumour Necrosis Factor Therapy in Older Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease Compared with Younger Patients: Data from the Sicilian Network for Inflammatory Bowel Diseases (SN-IBD)

Background and Objective: Older people with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) appear to have a lower response to anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) therapy, with more frequent complications than younger patients. The objective of this study was to assess persistence on therapy and the safety of anti-TNF therapy in older patients (aged ≥ 60 years). Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the database of the Sicilian Network for Inflammatory Bowel Diseases (SN-IBD), extracting data regarding IBD patients aged ≥ 60 years and controls < 60 years of age at their first course of anti-TNF treatment. Data concerning persistence on therapy over the first year of treatment (primary objective) together with data on reasons for treatment withdrawal, concomitant diseases and treatments were collected. Results: We identified 114 anti-TNF-naϊve patients aged ≥ 60 years (median age 64 years, range 60–80 years; 47 males) compared with 330 younger controls aged < 60 years (median age 39 years, range 18–59 years; 57 males). Older patients with Crohn’s disease (n = 73) showed a significantly lower persistence with every kind of anti-TNF therapy (whether analysed together [p < 0.001] or separately for intravenous and subcutaneous [SC] therapy) than younger controls, whereas older patients with ulcerative colitis (n = 41) showed a lower persistence when combining all kinds of anti-TNF treatment (p = 0.004) and for SC therapy. Secondary failures, infections, and neoplasias, but not primary failure, occurred more frequently in older IBD patients than in younger controls. Conclusion: Despite a comparable number of primary failures, older IBD patients treated for the first time with anti-TNF agents showed lower treatment persistence due to higher rates of secondary failure, adverse events, infections, and tumours than younger patients in the first year of follow-up. The reasons for this difference still remain unclear.