Nonclinical Evaluation of PF-06438179: A Potential Biosimilar to Remicade® (Infliximab)

Infliximab biosimilar GP1111: a review of 5 years' post-approval experience

INTRODUCTION

Infliximab is a chimeric monoclonal antibody against tumor necrosis factor alpha, and GP1111 (Zessly®, Sandoz) is the most recently approved infliximab biosimilar in Europe. We reviewed the approval process and key evidence for GP1111, focusing primarily on the indications of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

AREAS COVERED

This narrative review discusses preclinical, clinical, and real-world data for GP1111.

EXPERT OPINION

Results from the Phase III REFLECTIONS trial in patients with moderate-to-severe active RA despite methotrexate therapy confirmed the similarity in efficacy and safety between GP1111 and reference infliximab. Switching from reference infliximab to GP1111 in REFLECTIONS had no impact on efficacy or safety. Since the European approval of GP1111 in March 2018, real-world data have also confirmed the efficacy and safety of switching from another infliximab biosimilar to GP1111 in patients with RA and IBD. In addition, budget impact analysis of various sequential targeted treatments in patients with RA found that GP1111 was cost-effective when used early after failure of conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Therefore, 5 years' post-approval experience with GP1111 in RA and IBD, and key clinical and real-world evidence, support the safety and efficacy of continued use of GP1111 in all infliximab-approved indications.

Basic regulatory science behind drug substance and drug product specifications of monoclonal antibodies and other protein therapeutics

In this review, we focus on providing basics and examples for each component of the protein therapeutic specifications to interested pharmacists and biopharmaceutical scientists with a goal to strengthen understanding in regulatory science and compliance. Pharmaceutical specifications comprise a list of important quality attributes for testing, references to use for test procedures, and appropriate acceptance criteria for the tests, and they are set up to ensure that when a drug product is administered to a patient, its intended therapeutic benefits and safety can be rendered appropriately. Conformance of drug substance or drug product to the specifications is achieved by testing an article according to the listed tests and analytical methods and obtaining test results that meet the acceptance criteria. Quality attributes are chosen to be tested based on their quality risk, and consideration should be given to the merit of the analytical methods which are associated with the acceptance criteria of the specifications. Acceptance criteria are set forth primarily based on efficacy and safety profiles, with an increasing attention noted for patient-centric specifications. Discussed in this work are related guidelines that support the biopharmaceutical specification setting, how to set the acceptance criteria, and examples of the quality attributes and the analytical methods from 60 articles and 23 pharmacopeial monographs. Outlooks are also explored on process analytical technologies and other orthogonal tools which are on-trend in biopharmaceutical characterization and quality control.

A Review of the Occurrence of Rheumatoid Arthritis and Potential Treatments through Medicinal Plants from an Indian Perspective

Arthritis is a medical condition that affects the joints and causes inflammation, pain, and stiffness. There are different types of arthritis, and it can affect people of all ages, even infants and the elderly. Recent studies have found that individuals with diabetes, heart disease, and obesity are more likely to experience arthritis symptoms. According to the World Health Organization, over 21% of people worldwide suffer from musculoskeletal problems. Roughly 42.19 million individuals in India, constituting around 0.31% of the populace, have been documented as having Rheumatic Arthritis (RA). Compared to other common diseases like diabetes, cancer, and AIDS, arthritis is more prevalent in the general population. Unfortunately, there is no specific cure for arthritis, and treatment plans usually involve non-pharmacological methods, surgeries, and medications that target specific symptoms. Plant-based remedies have also been shown to be effective in managing inflammation and related complications. In addition to therapies, maintaining a healthy diet, exercise, and weight management are essential for managing arthritis. This review discusses the causes, prevalence, diagnostic methods, current and prospective future treatments, and potential medicinal plants that may act as anti-inflammatory or anti-rheumatic agents. However, more research is necessary to identify the underlying mechanisms and active molecules that could improve arthritis treatment.

Use of multibiomarker disease activity scores in biosimilarity studies for the treatment of patients with rheumatoid arthritis

Objectives

This exploratory analysis investigated the potential use of the multibiomarker disease activity (MBDA) score to support biosimilarity assessments using data from two randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of biosimilar infliximab (IFX-qbtx) and biosimilar adalimumab (ADL-afzb) versus EU-sourced infliximab (Remicade; IFX-EU) and adalimumab (Humira; ADL-EU) reference products, respectively, both conducted in adult patients with active rheumatoid arthritis.

Methods

In one study, patients (N=650) were randomised 1:1 to IFX-qbtx or IFX-EU (3 mg/kg intravenous at weeks 0, 2 and 6, then every 8 weeks). In the other, patients (N=597) were randomised 1:1 to ADL-afzb or ADL-EU (40 mg subcutaneous every other week). All treatments were given with MTX. Mean values of MBDA scores were calculated at baseline (BL), based on the concentrations of 12 serum proteins using the Vectra disease activity algorithm, and at timepoints throughout treatment period 1 (TP1) of the IFX (weeks 6, 14, 30) and ADL (weeks 6, 12, 26) studies. Data were summarised using descriptive statistics for the intent-to-treat population, without imputation for missing data.

Results

At BL, mean (±SD) MBDA scores were 61.3 (±12.5) and 58.8 (±13.2) for IFX-qbtx (n=236) and IFX-EU (n=248), respectively, and 57.2 (±14.44) and 58.3 (±15.34) for ADL-afzb (n=292) and ADL-EU (n=293), respectively. Mean MBDA scores were highly comparable between IFX-qbtx and IFX-EU and between ADL-afzb and ADL-EU at all measured timepoints during TP1 in each study.

Conclusions

These RCTs are the first to incorporate MBDA score as an exploratory assessment of biosimilarity. MBDA scores may provide objective, quantitative evidence of biosimilarity using an assessment of disease activity that is independent of the potential subjectivity inherent in joint counts, or in patient or physician global assessments.

Trial registration numbers

NCT02222493 and NCT02480153.

Analytical Similarity Assessment of Biosimilars: Global Regulatory Landscape, Recent Studies and Major Advancements in Orthogonal Platforms

Biopharmaceuticals are one of the fastest-growing sectors in the biotechnology industry. Within the umbrella of biopharmaceuticals, the biosimilar segment is expanding with currently over 200 approved biosimilars, globally. The key step towards achieving a successful biosimilar approval is to establish analytical and clinical biosimilarity with the innovator. The objective of an analytical biosimilarity study is to demonstrate a highly similar profile with respect to variations in critical quality attributes (CQAs) of the biosimilar product, and these variations must lie within the range set by the innovator. This comprises a detailed comparative structural and functional characterization using appropriate, validated analytical methods to fingerprint the molecule and helps reduce the economic burden towards regulatory requirement of extensive preclinical/clinical similarity data, thus making biotechnological drugs more affordable. In the last decade, biosimilar manufacturing and associated regulations have become more established, leading to numerous approvals. Biosimilarity assessment exercises conducted towards approval are also published more frequently in the public domain. Consequently, some technical advancements in analytical sciences have also percolated to applications in analytical biosimilarity assessment. Keeping this in mind, this review aims at providing a holistic view of progresses in biosimilar analysis and approval. In this review, we have summarized the major developments in the global regulatory landscape with respect to biosimilar approvals and also catalogued biosimilarity assessment studies for recombinant DNA products available in the public domain. We have also covered recent advancements in analytical methods, orthogonal techniques, and platforms for biosimilar characterization, since 2015. The review specifically aims to serve as a comprehensive catalog for published biosimilarity assessment studies with details on analytical platform used and critical quality attributes (CQAs) covered for multiple biotherapeutic products. Through this compilation, the emergent evolution of techniques with respect to each CQA has also been charted and discussed. Lastly, the information resource of published biosimilarity assessment studies, created during literature search is anticipated to serve as a helpful reference for biopharmaceutical scientists and biosimilar developers.

Need for a risk-based control strategy for managing glycosylation profile for biosimilar products

INTRODUCTION

Monoclonal antibodies, though a popular class of therapeutics, are complex molecules that are manufactured using complex processes, making it nontrivial to maintain high level of batch-to-batch consistency in product quality. Glycosylation is a posttranslation modification that is widely considered a critical quality attribute (CQA) as its variations are known to impact the Fc effector functions of mAbs. With continuing rise of biosimilars, comparability of these products to the reference product with respect to glycosylation is a topic of immense interest.

AREAS COVERED

In this article, we focus on the various aspects related to this topic including criticality of the various glycosylated forms, as well as comparability of biosimilars with respect to glycosylation.

EXPERT OPINION

We propose that manufacturers should focus on those glycoforms that are present in larger amounts and are known to be critical with respect to the biotherapeutic's safety and efficacy. Such risk-based evaluation of glycoforms and their control would offer an optimal route to biosimilar manufacturers for a cost-effective approach toward product development without compromising on the safety and efficacy characteristics of the therapeutic. For mAbs lacking Fc effector function, devising stringent glycosylation control strategies can be bypassed, thereby simplifying process and product development.

PAID study design on the role of PKC activation in immune/inflammation-related depression: a randomised placebo-controlled trial protocol

Background

Inflammation that is mediated by microglia activation plays an important role in the pathogenesis of depression. Microglia activation can lead to an increase in the levels of proinflammatory cytokines, including TNF-α, which leads to neuronal apoptosis in the specific neural circuits of some brain regions, abnormal cognition and treatment-resistant depression (TRD). Protein kinase C (PKC) is a key regulator of the microglia activation process. We assume that the abnormality in PKC might result in abnormal microglia activation, neuronal apoptosis, significant changes in emotional and cognitive neural circuits, and TRD. In the current study, we plan to target at the PKC signal pathway to improve the TRD treatment outcome.

Methods and analysis

This is a 12-week, ongoing, randomised, placebo-controlled trial. Patients with TRD (N=180) were recruited from Shanghai Mental Health Center, Shanghai Jiao Tong University. Healthy control volunteers (N=60) were recruited by advertisement. Patients with TRD were randomly assigned to 'escitalopram+golimumab (TNF-α inhibitor)', 'escitalopram+calcium tablet+vitamin D (PKC activator)' or 'escitalopram+placebo' groups. We define the primary outcome as changes in the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD-17). The secondary outcome is defined as changes in anti-inflammatory effects, cognitive function and quality of life.

Discussion

This study might be the first randomised, placebo-controlled trial to target at the PKC signal pathway in patients with TRD. Our study might help to propose individualised treatment strategies for depression.

Trial registration number

The trial protocol is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov under protocol ID 81930033 and ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT04156425.

Long-term Efficacy, Safety, and Immunogenicity of the Infliximab (IFX) Biosimilar, PF-06438179/GP1111, in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis After Switching from Reference IFX or Continuing Biosimilar Therapy: Week 54-78 Data From a Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase III Trial

Objective

Our objective was to evaluate the long-term efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of the infliximab biosimilar, PF-06438179/GP1111 (PF-SZ-IFX), in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who continued biosimilar treatment throughout 78 weeks or who switched from reference infliximab (Remicade^®) sourced from the EU (IFX-EU) at week 30 or week 54 in the REFLECTIONS B537-02 study.

Methods

In this phase III, double-blind, active-controlled study, patients with moderate-to-severe active RA were initially randomized to PF-SZ-IFX or IFX-EU, each with methotrexate (treatment period [TP] 1; N = 650). At week 30, patients receiving PF-SZ-IFX continued PF-SZ-IFX; patients receiving IFX-EU were re-randomized to continue IFX-EU or switch to PF-SZ-IFX (TP2; n = 566). From weeks 54 to 78, all patients received open-label treatment with PF-SZ-IFX (TP3; n = 505). Efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity data were analyzed during TP3.

Results

Efficacy was sustained and comparable across groups at week 78, with American College of Rheumatology criteria for ≥ 20% clinical improvement response rates of 75.9% (biosimilar group), 77.8% (week 30 switch group), and 68.3% (week 54 switch group). The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was 28.9%, 29.4%, and 30.2%, respectively. The proportion of patients who were antidrug antibody (ADA) positive and neutralizing antibody positive (as a percentage of ADA-positive patients) was stable and comparable between groups.

Conclusions

Results to week 78 continue to support the efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of PF-SZ-IFX in patients with moderate-to-severe active RA. There were no clinically meaningful differences between groups, independent of a single treatment transition from IFX-EU to PF-SZ-IFX at week 30 or week 54.

Trial Registration Number

NCT02222493.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s40259-019-00403-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

A comparative study of PF-06438179/GP1111 (an infliximab biosimilar) and reference infliximab in patients with moderate to severe active rheumatoid arthritis: A subgroup analysis

Aim

PF‐06438179/GP1111 (PF‐SZ‐IFX) is a biosimilar of reference infliximab (Remicade^®). This analysis compared the efficacy of PF‐SZ‐IFX and reference infliximab sourced from the European Union (IFX‐EU) in patient subgroups from a randomized, comparative study of PF‐SZ‐IFX versus IFX‐EU.

Methods

Patients with rheumatoid arthritis were randomized 1:1 to PF‐SZ‐IFX (n = 324) or IFX‐EU (n = 326); study drug (3 mg/kg) was administered intravenously at weeks 0, 2, and 6, then every 8 weeks thereafter. Subgroup analyses of efficacy endpoints such as American College of Rheumatology criteria for ≥20% clinical improvement (ACR20), change in high‐sensitivity C‐reactive protein (hs‐CRP), and change in Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, four components based on hs‐CRP (DAS28‐CRP) at weeks 14 and 30 were performed by age, gender, race, region, immunogenicity status, and treatment history.

Results

Overall, ACR20 response rates as well as changes in DAS28‐CRP and hs‐CRP at week 14 were similar between PF‐SZ‐IFX and IFX‐EU within the subgroups of age, gender, race, region, treatment history, and immunogenicity status. Results to week 30 support overall similarity in efficacy between the two treatment arms in all subgroups.

Conclusion

Overall, PF‐SZ‐IFX and IFX‐EU were similar in efficacy within the analyzed subgroups of age, gender, race, region, treatment history, and immunogenicity status. The efficacy results from these subgroup analyses were aligned with the previously described results for the overall population up to week 30.

Population pharmacokinetics of PF-06438179/GP1111 (an infliximab biosimilar) and reference infliximab in patients with moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis

Background: PF-06438179/GP1111 (PF-SZ-IFX) is an infliximab (IFX) biosimilar. Pharmacokinetic (PK) similarity of PF-SZ-IFX and reference IFX authorized in the European Union (ref-IFX-EU) and in the US (ref-IFX-US) was demonstrated in healthy subjects. Safety and efficacy of PF-SZ-IFX were investigated in a multinational, double-blind, randomized study in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients. This work aims to evaluate the population pharmacokinetics (PopPK) of ref-IFX-EU and PF-SZ-IFX in RA patients. Research design and methods: Patients with moderately to severely active RA (N = 650) were randomized 1:1 to PF-SZ-IFX or ref-IFX-EU. PopPK modeling with data collected from the study was performed using a nonlinear mixed-effects approach (NONMEM 7.2.0). Results: The PK of ref-IFX-EU and PF-SZ-IFX were adequately described using a two-compartment model with linear elimination. Clearance (CL) estimates were 0.014 L/h and 0.015 L/h for PF-SZ-IFX and ref-IFX-EU, with inter-individual variability (IIV) on CL of 43.1% and 40.1%, respectively. Volumes of distribution in the central compartment (V₁) were 3.38 L and 3.57 L, with IIV on V₁ of 28.1% and 23.7%, respectively. The same covariates of sex and antidrug antibody titers on CL, and body weight on V₁, influenced the PK variability of ref-IFX-EU and PF-SZ-IFX. Conclusions: PopPK analysis revealed no appreciable differences between the PK of ref-IFX-EU and PF-SZ-IFX in RA patients. Trial registration: The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (CT.gov identifier: NCT02222493).

An update on the animal studies conducted for biosimilar approvals - Regulatory requirement vs actual scenario

Nonclinical animal studies are considered as an integral part of biosimilar development program to demonstrate similarity and safety. We have compiled, reviewed and summarized animal studies conducted for European Medicines Agency (EMA) and United States Food and Drug Administration (US FDA) submission from 2006 till December 2018. The commonest animal studies conducted included repeat-dose toxicity study along with toxicokinetic, local tolerance and immunogenicity assessments, while the least common included primary pharmacodynamic, pharmacokinetic, safety pharmacology and single-dose toxicity studies. Animal studies were designed based on pharmacology of the drug, disease condition and innovator studies. Studies mostly used EU-sourced reference products as a comparator. For biosimilars approved both in the US and European Union (EU), similar data packages were submitted to these regions. Despite the regulatory guidelines allowing waiver of animal studies based on analytical data, animal studies have been conducted for almost all the approved biosimilars in the US and EU. There is an increasing need to re-assess the relevance of animal studies to support regulatory approval of biosimilars. Stepwise assessment for biosimilarity and conducting animal studies only if required at the right instance based on residual uncertainties may assist in optimizing animal study requirement for biosimilar development.

The 'totality-of-the-evidence' approach in the development of PF-06438179/GP1111, an infliximab biosimilar, and in support of its use in all indications of the reference product

The 'totality-of-the-evidence' biosimilarity concept requires that sufficient structural, functional, nonclinical, and clinical data are acquired in a stepwise manner, to demonstrate that no clinically meaningful differences in quality, safety, or efficacy are observed compared with the reference product. We describe the totality of the evidence for PF-06438179/GP1111 (PF-SZ-IFX; IXIFI™ [infliximab-qbtx]/Zessly®) that supported its approval as an infliximab (IFX) biosimilar for all eligible indications of reference IFX (ref-IFX; Remicade®) in Europe and in the US. Analytical similarity involving in vitro assays capable of distinguishing structural or functional differences between PF-SZ-IFX and ref-IFX formed a foundation for the biosimilarity exercise. Differences identified in N-glycosylation and charge heterogeneity were found not to impact the results in in vitro biological assays reflective of the pharmacology underlying the mechanisms of action (tumor necrosis factor binding, reverse signaling, antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity and complement-dependent cytotoxicity) of IFX across disease indications. Similarity was assessed in a comparative clinical pharmacokinetic study and in a clinical efficacy and safety study in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, where therapeutic equivalence between PF-SZ-IFX and ref-IFX provided confirmatory evidence of biosimilarity, and, when coupled with the analytical similarity already established, supported extrapolation to all eligible disease indications of ref-IFX.

Monoclonal Antibodies Targeting Ion Channels and Their Therapeutic Potential

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) represent a rapidly growing pharmaceutical class of protein drugs that becomes an important part of the precision therapy. mAbs are characterized by their high specificity and affinity for the target antigen, which is mostly present on the cell surface. Ion channels are a large family of transmembrane proteins that control ion transport across the cell membrane. They are involved in almost all biological processes in both health and disease and are widely considered as prospective targets. However, no antibody-based drug targeting ion channel has been developed so far that has progressed to clinical use. Thus, we provide a comprehensive review of the elaborated mAbs against ion channels, describe their mechanisms of action, and discuss their therapeutic potential.

Comparative charge-based separation study with various capillary electrophoresis (CE) modes and cation exchange chromatography (CEX) for the analysis of monoclonal antibodies

Charge heterogeneity is an important critical quality attribute for the analysis of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). For this, (imaged) capillary isoelectric focusing ((i)cIEF), ion exchange chromatography (IEC) and, recently, capillary zone electrophoresis (CZE) are the predominantly used techniques. In order to investigate which one is most suitable to answer a specific analytical question, here, the four aforementioned separation techniques were systematically evaluated using NISTmAb and Infliximab as test molecules. The performance parameters (precision, separation efficiency, linearity and sensitivity) were determined under comparable conditions. Moreover, important aspects for daily routine such as speed and ease of use were considered. Each technique has its own pros and cons. The (i)cIEF methodology is distinguished by its excellent separation efficiency. In addition, the native fluorescence mode in icIEF is a good tool to analyze small sample amounts (LOQ: 2.8 mg/l for Infliximab). Nevertheless, high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) still has superior precision. CZE, and also micellar electrokinetic chromatography (MEKC), have emerged as further interesting alternatives. For all techniques, variations connected to the sample preparation strongly influence precision. Looking at the relative standard deviation (RSD) values of the relative peak areas, all techniques provide acceptable performance (RSD: 0.6-1.6%).

Randomised, double-blind, phase III study comparing the infliximab biosimilar, PF-06438179/GP1111, with reference infliximab: efficacy, safety and immunogenicity from week 30 to week 54

Objective

To investigate the efficacy, safety and immunogenicity of PF-06438179/GP1111 (PF-SZ-IFX) compared with European reference infliximab (Remicade^®; ref-IFX) in patients with moderate-to-severe, active rheumatoid arthritis after continued long-term use of PF-SZ-IFX, and in patients who were switched from ref-IFX to PF-SZ-IFX.

Methods

REFLECTIONS B537-02 was a double-blind, active-controlled, multinational study in which patients (N=650) were initially randomised to PF-SZ-IFX or ref-IFX for 30 weeks (treatment period [TP] 1). During weeks 30–54 (TP2), the PF-SZ-IFX group (n=280) continued treatment with PF-SZ-IFX (PF-SZ-IFX/PF-SZ-IFX) and patients in the ref-IFX group (n=286) were rerandomised (1:1) to continue ref-IFX (ref-IFX/ref-IFX) (n=143) or switch to PF-SZ-IFX (ref-IFX/PF-SZ-IFX) (n=143) for a further 24 weeks. Efficacy, safety, immunogenicity and pharmacokinetics were evaluated.

Results

During TP2, patients in all three treatment groups continued to maintain comparable treatment response. At week 54, the American College of Rheumatology (ACR20) response rates were 71.1% (PF-SZ-IFX/PF-SZ-IFX), 64.3% (ref-IFX/ref-IFX) and 70.6% (ref-IFX/PF-SZ-IFX). Observations for other endpoints, including ACR50/70, Disease Activity Score in 28 Joints Based on High-Sensitivity C Reactive Protein(DAS28-CRP) remission, and mean change in DAS28-CRP and Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index, were also comparable. Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 36.8% (PF-SZ-IFX/PF-SZ-IFX), 33.6% (ref-IFX/ref-IFX) and 37.8% (ref-IFX/PF-SZ-IFX) of patients; there were no clinically meaningful differences in the safety profiles between groups. The percentage of patients who were antidrug antibody-positive was generally stable through the treatment period and comparable overall between the PF-SZ-IFX/PF-SZ-IFX (52.1%; neutralising: 80.8%), ref-IFX/ref-IFX (60.1%; neutralising: 84.9%) and ref-IFX/PF-SZ-IFX (58.0%; neutralising 78.3%) groups.

Conclusions

The similar efficacy, safety and immunogenicity of PF-SZ-IFX compared with ref-IFX were maintained for up to 54 weeks and were not affected by blinded treatment switch from ref-IFX to PF-SZ-IFX at week 30.

Trial registration number

NCT02222493.

Assessing the Extended In-Use Stability of the Infliximab Biosimilar PF-06438179/GP1111 Following Preparation for Intravenous Infusion

Objective

PF-06438179/GP1111 (PF-SZ-IFX) is an infliximab biosimilar. We evaluated the extended in-use physicochemical and biological stability of PF-SZ-IFX upon preparation for intravenous infusion.

Methods

Two batches of PF-SZ-IFX were reconstituted to a concentration of 10 mg/mL and subsequently diluted to 0.4 and 4.0 mg/mL, representing the clinically relevant range for intravenous infusion. Dilution was performed in polyethylene saline infusion bags, which are commonly used in clinical practice. To simulate product handling under worst-case conditions, reconstituted solutions were stored for up to 30 days at 5 ± 3 °C and up to 14 days at 25 ± 2 °C (60 ± 5% relative humidity); diluted solutions were stored for up to 30 days under the same sets of conditions. Physicochemical and biological stability were evaluated according to pH, osmolality, appearance, particulate content, protein concentration, proportions of molecular weight variants and charge variants and potency. Standard and state-of-the-art analytical techniques were employed, including imaged isoelectric focusing, size exclusion chromatography, reducing sodium dodecyl sulphate capillary electrophoresis and functional cell-based bioassay.

Results

Across batches and concentrations of PF-SZ-IFX, all parameters resided within the predefined acceptance criteria, including pH, osmolality, particulate content, clarity, protein concentration, molecular weight variants, charge variants and potency, for up to 30 days under both storage conditions tested (up to 14 days for reconstituted samples stored at 25 ± 2 °C).

Conclusions

Physicochemical and biological analyses demonstrated that the infliximab biosimilar PF-SZ-IFX was not affected by extended storage of the diluted preparations used for intravenous infusion.

PF-06438179/GP1111: An Infliximab Biosimilar

PF-06438179/GP1111 (Zessly®; Ixifi®) [hereafter referred to as GP1111] is a biosimilar of the reference monoclonal anti-TNF-α antibody infliximab, and is approved in the EU and USA for the same indications as the reference drug, including rheumatoid arthritis (RA), Crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis (including paediatric ulcerative colitis in the EU), ankylosing spondylitis, psoriatic arthritis and plaque psoriasis; GP1111 is also approved in Japan. GP1111 has similar physicochemical characteristics and pharmacodynamic properties to those of reference infliximab, and the pharmacokinetic similarity of the agents has been shown in healthy volunteers and patients with moderate-to-severe RA despite methotrexate therapy. GP1111 demonstrated clinical efficacy equivalent to that of reference infliximab in patients with moderate-to-severe RA, despite methotrexate therapy, and was generally well tolerated in this population. The tolerability, immunogenicity and safety profiles of GP1111 were similar to those of reference infliximab, and switching from reference infliximab to GP1111 had no impact on safety, efficacy or immunogenicity. The role of reference infliximab in the management of autoimmune inflammatory conditions is well established and GP1111 provides an effective biosimilar alternative for patients requiring infliximab therapy.

A randomized controlled trial comparing PF-06438179/GP1111 (an infliximab biosimilar) and infliximab reference product for treatment of moderate to severe active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate therapy

Background

This double-blind, active-controlled, randomized, multinational study evaluated the efficacy, safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity of PF-06438179/GP1111 (IxifiTM/Zessly®), an infliximab biosimilar, vs infliximab (Remicade®) reference product sourced from the European Union (infliximab-EU) in biologic-naïve patients with moderate to severe active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) despite methotrexate therapy. This paper reports results from the initial 30-week treatment period.

Methods

Patients (N = 650) were stratified by geographic region and randomized 1:1 to PF-06438179/GP1111 or infliximab-EU (3 mg/kg intravenous at weeks 0, 2, and 6, then every 8 weeks). Dose escalation to 5 mg/kg was allowed starting at week 14 for patients with inadequate RA response. The primary endpoint was American College of Rheumatology criteria for ≥ 20% clinical improvement (ACR20) response at week 14. Therapeutic equivalence was declared if the two-sided 95% CI for the treatment difference was within the symmetric equivalence margin of ± 13.5%. Statistical analysis was also performed with a two-sided 90% CI using an asymmetric equivalence margin (− 12.0%, 15.0%).

Results

Patients (80.3% female; 79.4% seropositive) had a mean RA duration of 6.9 years, and mean baseline Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, four components based on C-reactive protein was 6.0 in both arms. Week 14 ACR20 in the intention-to-treat population was 62.7% for PF-06438179/GP1111 and 64.1% for infliximab-EU. Week 14 ACR20 using nonresponder imputation was 61.1% for PF-06438179/GP1111 and 63.5% for infliximab-EU, and the 95% (− 9.92%, 5.11%) and 90% (− 8.75%, 4.02%) CIs for the treatment difference (− 2.39%) were entirely contained within the prespecified symmetric and asymmetric equivalence margins, respectively. No differences were observed between arms for secondary efficacy endpoints. Overall postdose antidrug antibody (ADA) rates through week 30 were 48.6% and 51.2% for PF-06438179/GP1111 and infliximab-EU, respectively. Efficacy and immunogenicity were similar between treatments for patients with dose escalation (at or after week 14), as well as between treatments for patients without dose escalation. Safety profiles of PF-06438179/GP1111 and infliximab-EU were similar, with no clinically meaningful differences observed between arms, including after ADA development. Serum drug concentrations were similar between arms at each time point during the initial 30-week treatment period.

Conclusion

PF-06438179/GP1111 and infliximab-EU demonstrated similar efficacy, safety, immunogenicity, and PK with or without dose escalation in patients with moderate to severe active RA on background methotrexate.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02222493. Registered on 21 August 2014.

EudraCT, 2013-004148-49. Registered on 14 July 2014.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13075-018-1646-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Progress with infliximab biosimilars for inflammatory bowel disease

INTRODUCTION

Biological therapies have revolutionized the treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) in the last two decades. Though biological drugs are effective, their use is associated with high costs and access to biological agents varies among countries. As the patent for the reference products expired, the advent of biosimilar monoclonal antibodies has been expected. Biosimilars represent less expensive alternatives compared to the reference product.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, authors will review the literature on the clinical efficacy, safety and immunogenicity of current and future biosimilar infliximabs. Short- and medium-term data from real-life cohorts and from randomized-clinical trials in IBD demonstrated similar outcomes in terms of efficacy, safety and immunogenicity as the reference product for CT-P13. Switch data from the reference to the biosimilar product are also accumulating (including the NOR-SWITCH and the CT-P13 3.4 study).

EXPERT OPINION

The use of biosimilar infliximab in IBD is increasing worldwide. Its use may be associated with budget savings leading to better access to biological therapies and consequently improved health outcomes. Switching from the originator to a biosimilar in patients with IBD is acceptable, although scientific and clinical evidence is lacking regarding reverse switching, multiple switching, and cross-switching among biosimilars in IBD patients.

Biosimilars in Dermatology - theory becomes reality

Biosimilars are biological medicines that are analogues of a specific reference product. Biosimilars of the tumor necrosis factor alpha inhibitors infliximab and etanercept are already approved and available for dermatological indications. Regulatory agencies require in-depth analysis of physicochemical and functional properties of these highly complex molecules as well as clinical data on their similarity regarding efficacy and safety in at least one clinical trial in a sensitive and homogeneous population. Thus, it must be shown that biosimilars are essentially the same as the originator product if they are to be licensed in regulated drug markets. As a consequence, these data are extrapolated from one molecule (the originator) to another (biosimilar) resulting in an approval that includes the same indications as the originator product. While extrapolation is well accepted and regulated, clear recommendations regarding the interchangeability of originators and biosimilars as well as data on multiple consecutive switching are missing. Current scientific knowledge does not argue against the use of biosimilars for dermatological indications, but sequential switching of biosimilars should be considered carefully. To increase confidence and enhance evidence for biosimilars, accurate documentation of the specific products given to each patient is essential and should preferably be included in patient registries.

A review of the literature analyzing benefits and concerns of infliximab biosimilar CT-P13 for the treatment of rheumatologic diseases: focus on interchangeability

The introduction of biological agents drastically changed the treatment paradigm of inflammatory arthritides, ameliorating the natural history of the diseases but concomitantly increasing the drug costs due to the manufacturing process. On this concern, biosimilar drugs may represent a valid option for reducing this elevated cost and increasing the availability of these highly effective treatments. Recently, CT-P13, the first biosimilar of infliximab, has been approved with the same indications established for the reference product (RP), and its daily use is progressively increasing. However, the experience with biosimilar drugs in the field of rheumatology is still limited, raising potential doubts and concerns on their correct management in real-life settings. Comparability analysis between CT-P13 and its RP was evaluated in equivalence randomized controlled trials (RCTs) - PLANETRA and PLANETAS - performed on patients with rheumatoid arthritis and axial spondylitis, respectively. CT-P13 and RP showed similar profile in terms of quality, biological activity, safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy. However, the interchangeability between infliximab RP and its biosimilar still represents the most challenging issue because of a lack of a long-lasting experience. To date, reassuring preliminary data on this topic were reported in open-label extensions of PLANETRA and PLANETAS RCTs and in ongoing real-life observational studies. These findings, taken all together, significantly affect the landscape of biosimilar regulatory pathways and strongly support CT-P13 introduction as a great opportunity for expanding the accessibility to these very effective and high-cost therapies.