Switch from branded to generic imatinib: impact on molecular responses and safety in chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia patients

Chronic myeloid leukaemia: Biology and therapy

Chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML) is caused by BCR::ABL1. Tyrosine kinase-inhibitors (TKIs) are the initial therapy. Several organizations have reported milestones to evaluate response to initial TKI-therapy and suggest when a change of TKI should be considered. Achieving treatment-free remission (TFR) is increasingly recognized as the optimal therapy goal. Which TKI is the best initial therapy for which persons and what depth and duration of molecular remission is needed to achieve TFR are controversial. In this review we discuss these issues and suggest future research directions.

Determinants of frontline tyrosine kinase inhibitor choice for patients with chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia: A study from the Registro Italiano LMC and Campus CML

BACKGROUND

Imatinib, dasatinib, and nilotinib are tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) approved in Italy for frontline treatment of chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia (CP-CML). The choice of TKI is based on a combined evaluation of the patient's and the disease characteristics. The aim of this study was to analyze the use of frontline TKI therapy in an unselected cohort of Italian patients with CP-CML to correlate the choice with the patient's features.

METHODS

A total of 1967 patients with CP-CML diagnosed between 2012 and 2019 at 36 centers throughout Italy were retrospectively evaluated; 1089 patients (55.4%) received imatinib and 878 patients (44.6%) received a second-generation (2G) TKI.

RESULTS

Second-generation TKIs were chosen for most patients aged <45 years (69.2%), whereas imatinib was used in 76.7% of patients aged >65 years (p < .001). There was a predominant use of imatinib in intermediate/high European long-term survival risk patients (60.0%/66.0% vs. 49.7% in low-risk patients) and a limited use of 2G-TKIs in patients with comorbidities such as hypertension, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, previous neoplasms, ischemic heart disease, or stroke and in those with >3 concomitant drugs. We observed a greater use of imatinib (61.1%) in patients diagnosed in 2018-2019 compared to 2012-2017 (53.2%; p = .002). In multivariable analysis, factors correlated with imatinib use were age > 65 years, spleen size, the presence of comorbidities, and ≥3 concomitant medications.

CONCLUSIONS

This observational study of almost 2000 cases of CML shows that imatinib is the frontline drug of choice in 55% of Italian patients with CP-CML, with 2G-TKIs prevalently used in younger patients and in those with no concomitant clinical conditions. Introduction of the generic formulation in 2018 seems to have fostered imatinib use.

Current evidence on the efficacy and safety of generic imatinib in CML and the impact of generics on health care costs

Since the introduction of imatinib, the management of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) has changed considerably. Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are the mainstay of CML treatment; however, the high financial burden of TKIs can be problematic for both the patients and health care systems. After the emergence of generics, reimbursement policies of many countries have changed, and generics offered an alternative treatment option for CML patients. There are many papers published on the use of generics in CML patients with conflicting results regarding both efficacy and safety. In this paper, we systematically reviewed the current literature on generic imatinib use in CML, and 36 papers were evaluated. Both in vitro and in vivo studies of generic imatinib showed comparable results with branded imatinib in terms of bioequivalence and bioavailability. In most studies, generics were comparable with the original molecule in terms of efficacy and safety, both in newly diagnosed patients and after switching from Gleevec. Some generic studies showed contradictory findings regarding efficacy and toxicity, and these differences can be attributed to some factors including the use of different generics in different countries. Both in hypothetical models and in real life, introduction of generic imatinib caused significant reduction in health care costs. In conclusion, generics are not inferior to original imatinib in terms of efficacy with an acceptable toxicity profile. Notwithstanding the generally favorable efficacy and safety of generics worldwide to date, we most probably still need more time to draw firmer conclusions on the longer-term outcomes of generics.