Evaluation of dose-tapering strategies for intravenous tocilizumab in rheumatoid arthritis patients using model-based pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic simulations

A Population Pharmacokinetic Model of Tocilizumab in Kidney Transplant Patients Treated for Chronic Active Antibody-Mediated Rejection: Comparison of Plasma Exposure Between Intravenous and Subcutaneous Administration Schemes

BACKGROUND

Tocilizumab prevents the clinical worsening of chronic active antibody-mediated rejection (CAAMR) in kidney transplant recipients. Following a global shortage of the intravenous pharmaceutical form in 2022, patients were switched from monthly intravenous administration of 8 mg/kg to weekly subcutaneous injection of 162 mg, raising the question of bioequivalence between these schemes of administration.

AIMS

We aimed to compare the areas under the curve (AUC) of tocilizumab in virtual simulations of populations treated with the two administration schemes and to identify the covariates that could contribute to pharmacokinetic variability of tocilizumab in kidney transplant patients with CAAMR who received tocilizumab as salvage treatment.

METHODS

This retrospective monocentric study included 43 kidney transplant patients (202 tocilizumab concentrations) with CAAMR treated with intravenous or subcutaneous tocilizumab between December 2020 and January 2023. We developed a population pharmacokinetic model using nonlinear mixed effects modeling and identified the covariates that could contribute to tocilizumab AUC variability. Monte Carlo simulations were then performed to assess the subcutaneous and intravenous tocilizumab AUC for 0-28 days (M1), 56-84 days (M3), 140-168 days (M6), and 308-336 days (M12). Bioequivalence was defined by SC/IV AUC geometric mean ratios (GMRs) between 0.80 and 1.25.

RESULTS

A two-compartment model with parallel linear and nonlinear elimination best described the concentration-time data. Significant covariates for tocilizumab clearance were body weight, urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (ACR), and inflammation status [C-reactive protein (CRP) ≥ 5 mg/L]. The GMR values and their 90% confidence intervals at M3, M6, and M12 were within the 0.8-1.25 margin for equivalence. Conversely, the 90% prediction intervals of the GMR were much wider than the 90% confidence intervals and did not fall within 0.8 and 1.25.

CONCLUSIONS

From month 3 of treatment, the subcutaneous and intravenous tocilizumab administration schemes provided average bioequivalent pharmacokinetic exposure at the population level but not at the individual level. Body weight, inflammation, ACR, and administration scheme should be considered to personalize the dose of tocilizumab for patients with CAAMR. Further studies are required to determine the target of tocilizumab exposure in kidney transplant patients with CAAMR.

Tocilizumab Dose Tapering Based on a Model-Based Algorithm is Feasible in Clinical Practice: A Short Communication

BACKGROUND

Tocilizumab in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a potential candidate for concentration-guided tapering because the standard dose of tocilizumab results in a wide range of serum concentrations, usually above the presumed therapeutic window, and an exposure-response relationship has been described. However, no clinical trials have been published to date on this subject. Therefore, the objective of this study was to assess the feasibility of the tapering of intravenous (iv) tocilizumab with the use of a pharmacokinetic model-based algorithm in RA patients.

METHODS

A randomized controlled trial with a double-blind design and follow-up of 24 weeks was conducted. RA patients who received the standard of tocilizumab for at least the past 24 weeks, which is 8 mg/kg every 4 weeks, were included. Patients with a tocilizumab serum concentration above 5 mg/L at trough were randomized between concentration-guided dose tapering, referred to as therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM), or the standard 8 mg/kg dose. In the TDM group, the tocilizumab dose was tapered with a recently published model-based algorithm to achieve a target concentration of 4-6 mg/L after 20 weeks of dose tapering.

RESULTS

Twelve RA patients were included and 10 were randomized between the TDM and standard dose group. The study was feasible regarding the predefined feasibility criteria and patients had a positive attitude toward therapeutic drug monitoring. In the TDM group, the tocilizumab trough concentration within patients decreased on average by 24.5 ± 18.3 mg/L compared with a decrease of 2.8 ± 12 mg/L in the standard dose group. None of the patients in the TDM group reached the drug range of 4-6 mg/L. Instead, tocilizumab concentrations of 1.6 and 1.5 mg/L were found for the 2 patients who completed follow-up on the tapered dose. No differences in RA disease activity were observed between the 2 study groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This study was the first to show that it is feasible to apply a dose-reduction algorithm based on a pharmacokinetic model in clinical practice. However, the current algorithm needs to be optimized before it can be applied on a larger scale.

Tapering of biological treatment in autoinflammatory diseases: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Biological treatment and treat-to-target approaches guide the achievement of inactive disease and clinical remission in Autoinflammatory Diseases (AID). However, there is limited evidence addressing optimal tapering strategies and/or discontinuation of biological treatment in AID. This study evaluates available evidence of tapering biological treatment and explores key factors for successful tapering.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted in Embase, MEDLINE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials using the OVID platform (1990-08/2020). Bibliographic search of relevant reviews was also performed. Studies/case series (n ≥ 5) in AID patients aged ≤ 18 years with biological treatment providing information on tapering/treatment discontinuation were included. After quality assessment aggregated data were extracted and synthesized. Tapering strategies were explored.

RESULTS

A total of 6035 records were identified. Four papers were deemed high quality, all focused on systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis (sJIA) (1 open-label randomized trial, 2 prospective, 1 retrospective observational study). Biological treatment included anakinra (n = 2), canakinumab (n = 1) and tocilizumab (n = 1). Strategies in anakinra tapering included alternate-day regimen. Canakinumab tapering was performed randomized for dose reduction or interval prolongation, whereas tocilizumab was tapered by interval prolongation. Key factors identified included early start of biological treatment and sustained inactive disease.

CONCLUSION

Tapering of biological treatment after sustained inactive disease should be considered. Guidance for optimal strategies is limited. Future studies may leverage therapeutic drug monitoring in combination with pharmacometric modelling to further enhance personalized "taper-to-target" strategies respecting individual patients and diseases aspects.

Therapeutic drug monitoring of biopharmaceuticals in inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal disease: a systematic literature review informing EULAR points to consider

The objectives of this review were to collect and summarise evidence on therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of biopharmaceuticals in inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases and to inform the EULAR Task Force for the formulation of evidence-based points to consider. A systematic literature review (SLR) was performed, covering technical aspects and (clinical) utility of TDM, to answer 13 research questions. MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane were searched until July 2020. American College of Rheumatology and EULAR abstracts were also considered for inclusion. Data were extracted in evidence tables and risk of bias assessment was performed. For the search on technical aspects, 678 records were identified, of which 22 papers were selected. For the clinical utility search, 3846 records were identified, of which 108 papers were included. Patient-related factors associated with biopharmaceutical blood concentrations included body weight, methotrexate comedication and disease activity. The identification of a target range was hampered by study variability, mainly disease activity measures and study type. Evidence was inconsistent for multiple clinical situations in which TDM is currently applied. However, for some particular scenarios, including prediction of future treatment response, non-response to treatment, tapering and hypersensitivity reactions, robust evidence was found. There is currently no evidence for routine use of proactive TDM, in part because published cost-effectiveness analyses do not incorporate the current landscape of biopharmaceutical costs and usage. This SLR yields evidence in favour of TDM of biopharmaceuticals in some clinical scenarios, but evidence is insufficient to support implementation of routine use of TDM.

A randomized phase-I pharmacokinetic trial comparing the potential biosimilar tocilizumab (QX003S) with the reference product (Actemra®) in Chinese healthy subjects

PURPOSE

QX003S is a biosimilar candidate for the reference tocilizumab, Actemra®. We investigated the tolerance, variability, and pharmacokinetics (PK) of QX003S biosimilar in healthy Chinese male subjects.

DESIGN

A randomised, double-blind, two-arm, parallel study was performed to examine the bioequivalence of QX003S (8 mg/kg) with that of Actemra® as a reference drug.

RESULTS

QX003S (N = 40) and Actemra® (N = 40) groups exhibited similar PK properties. The inter-subject variability ranged from 14.95% to 18.78%. The 90% confidence intervals of the ratios for Cmax, AUC0-t andAUC0-∞ in both groups were within the range of 80-125%. After administration, the number of subjects who tested positive for anti-drug antibodies (ADA) in the QX003S group and Actemra® groups was 6 (14.3%) and 14 (34.1%), respectively. Adverse reactions occurred in 100% and 97.6% subjects in the QX003S and Actemra® groups, respectively. The most common adverse reactions were decrease in fibrinogen level and neutrophil and leukocyte counts.

CONCLUSION

The PK characteristics and immunogenicity exhibited by QX003S were similar to that of the reference product, Actemra®. The safety profile was similar in the two treatment groups with mild-moderate adverse effects.Trial RegistrationThe trial is registered at Chinese Clinical Trial website (http://www.chinadrugtrials.org.cn/index.html#CTR20190002)Key pointsThis was the first clinical report of a new proposed tocilizumab biosimilar, QX003S.This phase-I randomized, controlled study compared pharmacokinetics, variability,immunogenicity, and safety of QX003S vs. the approved tocilizumab product (Actemra@).The results demonstrate bioequivalence between BAT1806 and the reference products (Actemra@), as well as comparable immunogenicity, safety and tolerability profiles.

A Phase I Clinical Study Comparing the Tolerance, Immunogenicity, and Pharmacokinetics of Proposed Biosimilar BAT1806 and Reference Tocilizumab in Healthy Chinese Men

Objective: The study aimed to explore the bioequivalence of a proposed biosimilar BAT1806 to its reference products marketed in the EU and US (RoActemra-EU and Actemra-US) among healthy Chinese men. The tolerance, immunogenicity, and pharmacokinetics (PK) of the three drugs were also investigated.

Methods: In this randomized, double-blind, single-dose, three-arm, parallel study, a single-dose of 4 mg/kg of the reference products, or the biosimilar was administered to the participants. The participants were followed up for 57 days, and PK, immunogenicity, and tolerance evaluations were completed during this period.

Results: The PK parameters were similar in all three groups: BAT1806 (n = 45), RoActemra-EU (n = 42), and Actemra-US (n = 42). The 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for the ratios of C_max, AUC_0–t and AUC_0–∞ were 86.90–104.41% for BAT1806 vs. RoActemra-EU, 91.70–106.15% for BAT1806 vs Actemra-US, and 90.04–105.53% for Actemra-US vs RoActemra-EU. For all comparisons, the 90% CIs for the C_max, AUC_0–t, and AUC_0–∞ were within the predefined bioequivalence limit of 80.00–125.00%. The intersubject variability ranged from 14.5% to 21.5%, which was considerably low. Among the participants, 19 (42.2%), 10 (23.8%), and 12 (28.6%) from the BAT1806, RoActemra-EU, and Actemra-US groups were, respectively, found to be positive for anti-drug antibodies, while 14 (31.1%), nine (21.4%), and 12 (28.6%) were positive for neutralizing antibodies. Nevertheless, these antibodies did not affect the drug concentrations, and the outcomes in the bioequivalence tests were similar after sensitivity analysis. Treatment-related and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were recorded in 27, 34, and 32 participants in the BAT1806, RoActemra-EU, and Actemra-US groups, respectively. The most common treatment-related adverse events observed were a decrease in neutrophil, and white blood cell counts.

Conclusion: The PK characteristics of BAT1806 were similar to those of the reference products, RoActemra-EU and Actemra-US. Both BAT1806 and the reference products exhibited low intersubject variability and similar safety profiles.

Clinical trial registration number:http://www.chinadrugtrials.org.cn/index.html, CTR20180039; https://clinicaltrials.gov/NCT03606876