A Review of the Totality of Evidence Supporting the Development of the First Adalimumab Biosimilar ABP 501

Introducing the Biosimilar Paradigm to Neurology: The Totality of Evidence for the First Biosimilar Natalizumab

A biosimilar medicine is a successor to a reference ('originator'/'original-brand') biologic medicine brought to market once the patent and exclusive marketing rights for the reference have expired. Biosimilar natalizumab (PB006 [biosim-NTZ]; developed by Polpharma Biologics S.A. and marketed globally as Tyruko®; Sandoz) has been developed as a successor to reference natalizumab (Tysabri® [ref-NTZ]; Biogen) and is the first US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved and European Medicines Agency (EMA)-approved biosimilar in neurology. As per the FDA and EMA indications for ref-NTZ, biosim-NTZ is approved to treat relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis (USA, EU) and Crohn's disease (USA only). Approval of biosim-NTZ was based on the 'totality of evidence', a comprehensive body of data collected during the development process, demonstrating similarity to its reference medicine. The foundational step of demonstrating structural and functional similarity between biosim-NTZ and ref-NTZ confirmed identical primary and indistinguishable higher order structures, as well as matching binding affinity to α4β1/α4β7 integrins. Following the confirmation of matching structure and function, pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic similarity of biosim-NTZ to ref-NTZ in healthy subjects was demonstrated, with no clinically meaningful differences identified in safety and immunogenicity. A comparative, double-blind, randomized study (Antelope) was also conducted in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis and demonstrated matching efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity with no clinically meaningful differences between biosim-NTZ and ref-NTZ. This review presents the totality of evidence that confirmed the biosimilarity of biosimilar natalizumab to its reference medicine, which supported its approval by the FDA and the EMA. [Graphical plain language summary available].

Effect of treatment with original or biosimilar adalimumab on SARS-CoV2 vaccination antibody titers

The technological process of production of biosimilars determines the degree of biosimilarity to the original biological drug. In particular, the focus is on the similarity of immunogenic responses. The primary endpoint of our retrospective study was to find the differences in SARS-CoV-2 antibody amount between patients treated with original adalimumab and biosimilar adalimumab MSB11022 (Idacio) and the differences in the SARS-CoV-2 antibody amount between patients treated with and without biological treatment. We collected the gender, autoimmune disease type, age, and treatment data of the patients in the outpatient clinic MEDICAL PLUS, s.r.o., Uherske Hradiste. These patients suffer from autoimmune rheumatic diseases. All patients received the mRNA vaccine (Pfizer/BioNTech - BNT162b2), with a 21-day (interquartile range, 21-24) gap between the two vaccinations. Patients receiving adalimumab were able to develop cellular immune responses after the second vaccination dose, as well as the individuals without adalimumab. In the period of 6-23 weeks after the second vaccination dose (D63 - D182), the SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels did not change significantly in the patients receiving the original adalimumab, while in the patients receiving biosimilar adalimumab a significant decrease was revealed. A statistically significant difference in the SARS-CoV-2 antibody amount between the patients without biological treatment (median: 504.3 U/mL) and with biological treatment (Original and Biosimilar - median: 47.2 and 28.2 U/mL, respectively) was confirmed on day 182. According to our observation, the effect of the treatment type on the increase/decrease of antibodies over time is dominant, while the impact of other variables (gender, methotrexate treatment, autoimmune disease type, and age) was confirmed as insignificant or minor.

Treatment Persistence and Switching Patterns of Adalimumab Biosimilar ABP 501 in European Patients with Rheumatologic Diseases

INTRODUCTION

ABP 501 was an adalimumab (ADA) biosimilar approved for treating immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) including rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and ankylosing spondylitis (AS). In this retrospective study, we aimed to examine the treatment patterns of ABP 501 among patients with these IMIDs using German and French pharmacy claims databases.

METHODS

Patients with RA, PsA, or AS who initiated ABP 501 between October 2018 and March 2020 and were observed continuously for ≥ 365 days both before and after ABP 501 initiation were included. Descriptive analyses of persistence and switch after ABP 501 discontinuation were conducted and reported for each disease cohort by prior use of ADA products (patients naïve to ADA or patients experienced with ADA).

RESULTS

Median (95% confidence interval) persistence on ABP 501 was 9.4 (8.6-10.3), 10.2 (9.0-11.7), and 12.1 (11.0-13.1) months in German patients, and 11.7 (9.9-13.3), 7.1 (5.8-8.4), and 10.8 (9.6-11.9) months in French patients for RA, PsA, and AS, respectively. For patients who switched from ABP 501 to another targeted therapy during the first 12 months of follow-up, switching patterns varied between patients naïve to ADA and patients experienced with ADA in both Germany and France, with patients naïve to ADA switching most frequently to other targeted therapies including non-ADA tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi), non-TNFi biologic, or Janus Kinase inhibitor (JAKi) and patients experienced with ADA switching most frequently back to ADA reference product (RP).

CONCLUSIONS

Across three rheumatologic diseases, about half of patients persisted on ABP 501 at the end of 12 months after treatment initiation in both Germany and France. Patients experienced with ADA were more likely to switch back to ADA RP, regardless of indication and country, suggesting a possible nocebo effect. Future studies are warranted to understand reasons of discontinuation and switching.

Treatment persistence and switching patterns of ABP 501 in European patients with inflammatory bowel disease

Background

Approval of the adalimumab (ADA) biosimilar ABP 501 for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) indications was based on the principle of extrapolation, without indication-specific clinical trial data.

Objectives

To evaluate the real-world treatment patterns of ABP 501 in patients with IBD.

Design

Retrospective analysis of pharmacy claims data from Germany and France.

Methods

Continuously insured adult IBD patients who initiated ABP 501 between October 2018 and March 2020 were included. Treatment persistence, adherence, and post-ABP 501 switching patterns were evaluated for two mutually exclusive groups: ADA-naïve patients (i.e. no baseline use of ADA products) and ADA-experienced patients (i.e. previously treated with ADA products).

Results

A total of 3362 German patients and 733 French patients were included, with 54.4% and 65.3% being ADA-naïve patients, respectively. Median persistence (95% CI) on ABP 501 was 10.9 months (9.8-11.6) in ADA-naïve patients and 14.2 months (12.7-15.2) in ADA-experienced patients in Germany; for the French cohort, ADA-naïve and -experienced patients had median persistence of 12.8 months (10.2-14.7) and 11.5 months (8.8-14.4), respectively. During the first 12 months of ABP 501 initiation, 53.7% of German patients and 51.0% of French patients were adherent to the therapy. About 20% of patients in both countries switched from ABP 501 to another targeted therapy. In the German cohort, ADA-naïve patients most frequently switched to non-tumor necrosis factor inhibitor biologics, but ADA-experienced patients most commonly switched to reference product (RP); in the French cohort, patients most often switched to RP regardless of prior exposure to ADA products.

Conclusion

About 50% of patients persisted on and were adherent to ABP 501 therapy during the first 12 months after treatment initiation in two large European countries. Post-ABP 501, switching patterns varied between countries, indicating diversified treatment practices warranting further research on reason(s) for switching and potential overall treatment outcomes.

Influence of adalimumab on interleukin 12/23 signalling pathways in human keratinocytes treated with lipopolysaccharide A

Introduction

The interleukin-12/23 (IL-12/23) signalling pathway plays an important role in the pathogenesis of psoriasis. In addition, even molecularly targeted therapy has been reported to lose adequate response to treatment.

Aim

To determine the expression patterns of mRNAs and miRNAs related to IL-12/23 signalling pathways in the human keratinocyte culture exposed to liposaccharide A (LPS) and then adalimumab in comparison with untreated cells.

Material and methods

Human, adult, low-Calcium, high-Temperature keratinocyte (HaCaT) cultures were exposed to 1 µg/ml LPS for 8 h, and then adalimumab was added to the cultures at a concentration of 8 µg/ml and incubated for 2, 8, and 24 h. We used mRNA and miRNA microarray, quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction, and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay techniques.

Results

STAT1, STAT3, STAT5, IL-6, IL-6R, SOCS3, and JAK3 genes differentiated HaCaT cultures with the drug from controls regardless of the time the cells were exposed to the drug. The addition of adalimumab to a culture previously exposed to LPS resulted in silencing of SOCS3 and IL-6 expression compared to the control, while for the other transcripts they were found to be overexpressed compared to the control culture. The assessment indicated the strongest connections between JAK3 and hsa-miR-373-5p (target score 96); SOCS3, STAT5, and hsa-miR-1827 (target score 96).

Conclusions

Our study indicates that adalimumab has the strongest modulating effect on mRNA and miRNA expression of JAK/STAT and IL-6-dependent IL-12/23 pathways.

Multi-attribute method (MAM) to assess analytical comparability of adalimumab biosimilars

Adalimumab drug product (Humira ®), the first fully human monoclonal antibody (mAb) approved by FDA in 2002, led the top ten list of best-selling mAbs in 2018 and has been the most profitable drug in the world. With the expiration of patent protection in Europe in 2018 and in United States by 2023, the landscape is changing as up to 10 adalimumab biosimilars are expected to enter the market in the US. Biosimilars offer the potential to lower costs on health care systems and increase patient accessibility. The analytical similarity of seven different adalimumab biosimilars was accomplished in the present study using the multi-attribute method (MAM), a LC-MS based peptide mapping technique that allows for primary sequence assessment and evaluation of multiple quality attributes including deamidation, oxidation, succinimide formation, N- and C- terminal composition and detailed N-glycosylation analysis. In the first step, characterization of the most relevant post-translational modifications of a reference product was attained during the discovery phase of MAM. During the second step, as part of the MAM targeted monitoring phase, adalimumab batch-to batch variability was evaluated to define statistical intervals for the establishment of similarity ranges. The third step describes biosimilarity evaluation of predefined quality attributes and new peak detection for the assessment of any new or modified peak compared to the reference product. This study highlights a new perspective of the MAM approach and its underlying power for biotherapeutic comparability exercises in addition to analytical characterization. MAM offers a streamlined comparability assessment workflow based on high-confidence quality attribute analysis using high-resolution accurate mass mass spectrometry (HRAM MS) and the capability to detect any new or modified peak compared to the reference product.

Preparing for the market entry of adalimumab biosimilars in the US in 2023: A primer for specialty pharmacists

PURPOSE

The impact of the market entry of adalimumab biosimilars on clinical practices and specialty pharmacies is explained. A roadmap is also provided for how pharmacists can successfully navigate this landscape.

SUMMARY

Biosimilars have previously been introduced as a mechanism to help curb biologic expenditures, with biosimilars undergoing an abbreviated regulatory approval process that focuses on biosimilarity and generating product competition. Adalimumab is currently the leading product in the biologics market, generating approximately $20 to $30 billion in sales worldwide consecutively from 2019 to 2021. Many adalimumab biosimilars are slated to enter the market in 2023 and become available for patient use. However, compared to other biosimilars, adalimumab biosimilars have several unique considerations, such as interchangeability and concentration, that will impact pharmacy practices and workflows. Because pharmacists embedded in clinical practices and specialty pharmacies will be significantly involved in the processes relating to adalimumab biosimilar implementation, adoption, and use, a primer on understanding the various adalimumab biosimilar products available and considerations surrounding these products with regard to workflow and patient use is critical. Several resources are also provided to help pharmacists successfully navigate the adalimumab biosimilar landscape.

CONCLUSION

The biosimilar landscape continues to evolve, and 2023 will see the launch of several adalimumab biosimilar products, which vary with regard to formulation, concentration, and interchangeability status. Pharmacists are well positioned to educate providers and patients about this landscape and help implement an efficient workflow to support adalimumab biosimilar adoption and use.

The Non-medical Switch from Reference Adalimumab to Biosimilar Adalimumab is Highly Successful in a Large Cohort of Patients with Stable Inflammatory Rheumatic Joint Diseases: A Real-Life Observational Study

Introduction

The adalimumab biosimilar (ADAbio) Amgevita® has a similar efficacy and safety profile as the adalimumab reference (ADA) Humira®. We studied the clinical consequences of a non-medical switch from ADA to ADAbio in adult patients with mainly established rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and spondyloarthritis (SpA).

Methods

Patients that received treatment with ADA for at least three months were switched to ADAbio. Data was collected retrospectively from 1 year before the switch up to 6 months after.

Results

A total of 603 patients were switched from ADA to ADAbio (switch group). During a 1-year follow-up, over 93% of all patients underwent a successful transition in terms of disease activity and safety from ADA to biosimilar, supporting the bioequivalence of both drugs in patients with stable inflammatory rheumatic joint diseases. Forty patients (6.6%) switched back to ADA (re-switch group). There were no objective changes in disease activity score in 28 joints using C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP), or adverse effects before and after the switch between both groups.

Conclusions

In line with earlier reports, the transition to ADAbio went successful in the majority of patients with stable inflammatory rheumatic joint diseases. Patient-reported symptoms without objective signs that indicate a flare of disease activity after the switch to ADAbio are probably explained by nocebo effects. A pre-emptive approach to counteract nocebo effects and stimulate placebo response may have a positive impact on health outcomes for patients and preserve the economic benefits of cost savings that can be achieved by prescribing a biosimilar instead of the reference drug.

A review of the totality of evidence supporting the development and approval of a pegfilgrastim biosimilar (LA-EP2006)

OBJECTIVE

The totality-of-evidence approach requires that similarity between a proposed biosimilar and a reference biologic is demonstrated across a range of analytical, preclinical, and clinical parameters to establish biosimilarity. We describe the totality of evidence for Sandoz biosimilar pegfilgrastim (LA-EP2006 [marketed as Ziextenzo]) that supported its regulatory approval in Europe and the United States.

METHODS

Analytical similarity to the reference biologic [marketed by Amgen as Neulasta] was first investigated with regard to physiochemical quality attributes such as primary structure, pegylation, higher-order structures, variants and impurities, molecular size variants, and formulation (protein content, pH, excipients, etc.). In vitro biological activity studies were performed to examine the primary mechanism of action of pegfilgrastim. Bioequivalence (clinical pharmacokinetics [PK] and pharmacodynamics [PD]) of Sandoz biosimilar pegfilgrastim to the reference biologic was studied in healthy volunteers; efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity were assessed during confirmatory clinical efficacy studies in patients undergoing treatment for breast cancer.

RESULTS

No meaningful or relevant differences were identified between Sandoz biosimilar pegfilgrastim and the reference biologic during analytical testing. Similar receptor binding and induction of cellular proliferation in vitro confirmed no functional differences between the biologics. Clinical studies in healthy adult participants demonstrated PK/PD biosimilarity and a similar safety profile between biosimilar and reference pegfilgrastim. Clinical studies in a sensitive patient population also demonstrated similar efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity between Sandoz biosimilar pegfilgrastim and the reference biologic.

CONCLUSIONS

The totality of evidence confirms that Sandoz biosimilar pegfilgrastim matches the reference biologic and will therefore provide equivalent efficacy and safety in all eligible indications.

Janus kinase versus TNF inhibitors: where we stand today in rheumatoid arthritis

INTRODUCTION

In recent decades, Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatment landscape has evolved with the induction of new biological and targeted therapies that provide significant therapeutic benefits in patients with sustained disease.

AREAS COVERED

Tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) were the first biologics used in the treatment of RA. Although they present a significant efficacy, an insufficient response of some patients led to further research and discovery of targeted therapies, such as Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi), which act at a molecular level, regulating many cytokines. Clinical benefits have been seen with both TNFi and JAKi as monotherapy and combined with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Still, some significant side effects have been reported with JAKi, and several questions remain about their safety and selectivity in action. This review summarizes the current knowledge on the mechanism of action, the clinical efficacy, and safety of TNFi vs. JAKi.

EXPERT OPINION

TNFi and JAKi are particularly useful in treating inflammatory arthropathies. Both drug categories are recommended by ACR and EULAR institutions in RA patients suffering from moderate to severe disease. Safety data in long-term studies are required to determine the optimal benefit to the risk profile of JAKi use.

Efficacy and Safety of HLX03, an Adalimumab Biosimilar, in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Plaque Psoriasis: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase III Study

INTRODUCTION

Adalimumab has been used successfully in the treatment of psoriasis. The objective of the study is to compare the efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity between HLX03, an adalimumab biosimilar, and adalimumab in Chinese patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis.

METHODS

In this double-blind, active-controlled, parallel-group study, 262 patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis were randomized (1:1) to receive HLX03 or adalimumab (80 mg at week 1, 40 mg at week 2, and then 40 mg every 2 weeks) for 48 weeks. The primary endpoint was improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score at week 16 comparing to baseline. Equivalence was demonstrated if 95% confidence interval (CI) of the between group difference fell within the equivalence margins of ± 15%. Other efficacy endpoints, safety and immunogenicity were also evaluated.

RESULTS

In the full analysis set, PASI improvements at week 16 was 83.5% (n = 131) in the HLX03 group and 82.0% (n = 130) in the adalimumab group, with a least-square-mean difference of 1.5% (95% CI - 3.9% to 6.8%). There were no significant between-group differences in all secondary efficacy analyses including proportion of patients achieving ≥ 75% improvement from baseline PASI (PASI 75), physician global assessment (PGA) 0/1 (clear or almost clear) and change in dermatology life quality index (DLQI) score. The incidences of adverse events and the proportion of patients with antidrug antibodies were also comparable between the two treatment groups.

CONCLUSION

HLX03 demonstrated equivalent efficacy, similar safety and immunogenicity to reference adalimumab, supporting its development as an alternative treatment for patients with plaque psoriasis in China.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinadrugtrials.org.cn, CTR20171123 (November 27, 2017); ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03316781 (October 20, 2017).

Randomised, phase I pharmacokinetic study of adalimumab biosimilar CT-P17 (40 mg/0.4 mL) by autoinjector and prefilled syringe in healthy subjects

AIMS

To evaluate pharmacokinetic equivalence and preliminary safety of the adalimumab biosimilar CT-P17 administered via autoinjector (CT-P17 AI) or prefilled syringe (CT-P17 PFS) in healthy subjects.

METHODS

This phase I, open-label study (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04295356) randomised subjects (1:1) to receive a single 40-mg (100 mg/mL) dose of CT-P17 AI or CT-P17 PFS. Primary endpoint was pharmacokinetic equivalence of CT-P17 AI to CT-P17 PFS for: area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity (AUC0-inf ); area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to the last quantifiable concentration (AUC0-last ); maximum serum concentration (Cmax ). Equivalence was determined if the 90% confidence interval for the geometric least-squares mean ratio was within the 80-125% equivalence margin. Additional pharmacokinetic endpoints, safety and immunogenicity were evaluated.

RESULTS

Of 193 subjects who were randomised (98 CT-P17 AI; 95 CT-P17 PFS), 180 received study drug. Pharmacokinetic equivalence was demonstrated: 90% confidence intervals were within the 80-125% equivalence margin (AUC0-inf : 93.98-114.29; AUC0-last : 91.09-121.86; Cmax : 94.08-111.90). Mean serum CT-P17 concentrations, secondary pharmacokinetic parameters and numbers of subjects with antidrug antibodies (ADAs) or neutralising ADAs were comparable between groups. AUC0-inf , AUC0-last and Cmax were numerically lower for ADA-positive than for ADA-negative subjects (both groups); pharmacokinetic equivalence was also demonstrated among ADA-positive subjects. CT-P17 AI and CT-P17 PFS were well tolerated, with comparable overall safety profiles.

CONCLUSIONS

CT-P17 AI and CT-P17 PFS were pharmacokinetically equivalent. Overall safety and immunogenicity were comparable between the 2 delivery devices.

Investigation of the Physicochemical and Biological Stability of the Adalimumab Biosimilar CT-P17

INTRODUCTION

CT-P17 (Celltrion, Inc., Incheon, Republic of Korea) is a biosimilar of reference adalimumab (Humira^®; AbbVie Inc., North Chicago, IL, USA), which has recently received regulatory approval from the European Medicines Agency.

METHODS

This analysis was designed to evaluate the stability profile of CT-P17 compared with reference adalimumab and the currently licensed adalimumab biosimilars ABP 501 (Amjevita^®/Amgevita^®; Amgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, USA) and SB5 (Imraldi^®; Biogen Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA) when stored at low temperature (5 °C) or room temperature (25 °C) with 60% relative humidity for up to 28 days.

RESULTS

Multiple orthogonal and complementary tests demonstrated that CT-P17 was stable for 28 days under all tested conditions, as well as for protein concentrations tested (50 vs 100 mg/mL), type of delivery device (autoinjector vs prefilled syringe), and manufacturing date (recently manufactured vs aged for 17 months). There were slight differences among products in terms of charge variants, oxidation level, purity, and number of subvisible particles; however, overall, the quality of each product was maintained over 28 days.

CONCLUSION

Our data suggest that CT-P17 may be used without any significant loss of stability when stored at 5 °C or 25 °C with 60% relative humidity for up to 28 days, and was not impacted by protein concentration tested and delivery device. Comparative stability data suggest that the appropriate maximum storage period for CT-P17 may be up to 28 days at room temperature with 60% relative humidity.

A propensity score-weighted comparison between adalimumab originator and its biosimilars, ABP501 and SB5, in inflammatory bowel disease: a multicenter Italian study

BACKGROUND

Adalimumab is an effective and safe biological drug for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Nowadays, several biosimilar agents are available, but data regarding their efficacy and safety in patients with IBD are still lacking. We aimed to compare the effectiveness and tolerability between adalimumab originator, ABP501 and SB5 biosimilars in patients with IBD in the short term (after induction and after 6 months of treatment) through a propensity score-weighted multicenter cohort study.

METHODS

We included 156 patients with IBD, 69 patients with ulcerative colitis and 87 patients with Crohn's disease (CD) receiving ABP501 or SB5 biosimilars from January 2019 to April 2020 for moderate-to-severe disease. For comparison, a group of age- and sex-matched patients treated with adalimumab originator was used. We collected clinical and biochemical data after induction and at 6 months of treatment. Endoscopic data were recorded only at baseline.

RESULTS

Overall, clinical benefit was achieved by 86.4% and 85.3% after induction and at 6 months, respectively, without a statistically significant difference between the three treatment groups (p = 0.68 and p = 0.46). However, after induction, we found significant differences between the two types of the disease (ulcerative colitis or CD, p = 0.004), with a greater clinical benefit achieved by patients with CD. Also, the therapeutic optimization rate between the three drugs was not statistically significant different (p = 0.30). All treatments showed a good safety profile, with only 10 patients who needed to stop therapy because of adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Adalimumab biosimilars seem to be as effective and safe as the originator in patients with IBD. Surely, they represent a great opportunity to reduce the costs of biological therapies, however larger and longer real-life studies are necessary.

A single-centre, observational, retrospective, real-life study evaluating adalimumab biosimilar ABP 501 in the treatment of plaque-type psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis in originator-naïve patients and in patients undergoing non-medical switch from originator

BACKGROUND

ABP 501 is a biosimilar to the anti-tumor necrosis factor-alfa monoclonal antibody adalimumab and despite its effectiveness and safety in the treatment of psoriasis was demonstrated in randomized clinical trials, no real-life data are available, in particular in patients undergoing non-medical switch from originator to biosimilar.

METHODS

We retrospectively searched our clinical records for all patients receiving ABP 501 between March 10, 2019 and September 7, 2019 at our Department. Therefore, we identified 94 patients, 46 patients underwent non-medical switch from adalimumab reference product to ABP 501.

RESULTS

In originator-naïve patients, mean PASI significantly improved from baseline to week 24 (p < .0001) in both Pso and PsA cohorts. In these patients, mean DAS-28 ESR improved with no significant differences from baseline. In patients undergoing non-medical switch from adalimumab reference product to ABP 501, no significant difference in PASI or DAS-28 ESR were observed from week 16 before switch to week 24 after switch.

CONCLUSIONS

AB- 501 is an effective treatment for plaque-type psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis regardless if patients are originator-naïve or if they were switched from the reference product.

Adalimumab biosimilars, ABP501 and SB5, are equally effective and safe as adalimumab originator

To date, data on effectiveness and safety of Adalimumab (ADA) biosimilars in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) are lacking. Therefore, we aimed to verify the ability of ABP501 and SB5 to maintain the clinical and biochemical response induced by the ADA originator, after switching to them. We prospectively analyzed data collected from 55 patients with IBD who switched to ABP501, and 25 patients with IBD who switched to SB5, from ADA originator at four IBD Units between 2018 and 2020. In addition, we included an age and sex-matched control group (n = 38) who continued ADA originator for at least two years and who did not switch to a biosimilar drug. Clinical and biochemical data (C-Reactive Protein (CRP), fecal calprotectin (FC)), concomitant steroid and/or immunosuppressant therapy at the time of the switch and after six months were collected. At six months, in the ABP501 group, we did not observe statistically significant modifications in clinical activity of disease (p = 0.09) and FC values (p = 0.90)_. Some patients (n = 8) needed to add steroids at six months after switching (p = 0.01), however the need for optimization was not significant between the two timepoints (p = 0.70). Finally, 14.5% patients stopped therapy after six months. Similarly, in the SB5 group we observed a stability of clinical activity and FC values (p = 0.90 and p = 0.20), and a concomitant statistically significant decrease in CRP (p = 0.03). There were no differences in steroids/immunosuppressants need or optimizing biological therapy in this group. Finally, drug survival curves of patients who switched from originator to ABP501 and those who continued ADA originator were similar (p = 0.20). Overall, biosimilar drugs seem to be as effective and safe as the originator. Further larger and longer studies are mandatory to understand the clinical implications of these findings.

Deciphering Role of Cytokines for Therapeutic Strategies Against Rheumatoid Arthritis

Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) is a systemic, chronic, autoimmune, inflammatory disorder that affects both large and small synovial joints in a symmetric pattern. RA initiates as painful inflammation of the joints leading to stiffness of joint, joint destruction and further worsens the condition causing permanent irreversible damage to the joints, making them physically disabled. Across the globe, there are around 1.2 million cases of RA reported. Inspite of various available therapeutic and pharmacological agents against RA, none of the treatments assure complete cure. Understanding the in depth-role of cytokines and interleukins in the disease pathogenesis of RA could help in exploiting them for developing novel therapeutic strategies against RA. This review provides insights into the pathogenesis of RA and gives a brief overview of cytokines, which play an important role in the progression of the disease. We have also discussed the possible role of interleukins in the context of RA, which could help future researchers to explore them for identifying new therapeutic agents.

Metabolic, pharmacokinetic, and toxicological issues of biologic therapies currently used in the treatment of hidradenitis suppurativa

INTRODUCTION

Hidradenitis suppurativa is a chronic, relapsing, debilitating inflammatory dermatologic disease of the terminal hair follicles at intertriginous sites clinically characterized by painful inflammatory nodules, abscesses, draining sinus tracts, and dermal fibrosis. The management of hidradenitis suppurativa is a challenge and usually consists of both medical and surgical approaches, which must often be combined for best outcome. The introduction of biological therapies, specifically TNFα-inhibitors such as adalimumab, has profoundly changed the therapeutic armamentarium of the disease.

AREAS COVERED

The PubMed database was searched using combinations of the following keywords: hidradentis suppurativa, biologic therapy, TNF-α inhibitors, adalimumab, etanercept, infliximab, certolizumab pegol, golimumab, adverse effects, pharmacodynamics, pharmacology, adverse events, pharmacokinetics, drug interaction. This article reviews and updates the chemistry, pharmacokinetics, mechanism of action, adverse effects, drug interactions of on-label and off-label use of TNF-α inhibitors in HS.

EXPERT OPINION

Biologic agents, particularly adalimumab, exhibit clinical efficacy in patients with hidradenitis suppurativa. Careful patient selection and close monitoring during treatment are mandatory to provide safe and effective use of the TNF-α inhibitor. Familiarity with biologic agents is crucial because these agents could become a consolidated treatment option in the clinician's therapeutic approaches.

Challenges for biosimilars: focus on rheumatoid arthritis

Healthcare systems worldwide are struggling to find ways to fund the cost of innovative treatments such as gene therapies, regenerative medicine, and monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). As the world's best known mAbs are close to facing patent expirations, the biosimilars market is poised to grow with the hope of bringing prices down for cancer treatment and autoimmune disorders, however, this has yet to be realized. The development costs of biosimilars are significantly higher than their generic equivalents due to therapeutic equivalence trials and higher manufacturing costs. It is imperative that academics and relevant companies understand the costs and stages associated with biologics processing. This article brings these costs to the forefront with a focus on biosimilars being developed for Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA). mAbs have remarkably changed the treatment landscape, establishing their superior efficacy over traditional small chemicals. Five blockbuster TNFα mAbs, considered as first line biologics against RA, are either at the end of their patent life or have already expired and manufacturers are seeking to capture a significant portion of that market. Although in principle, market-share should be available, withstanding that the challenges regarding the compliance and regulations are being resolved, particularly with regards to variation in the glycosylation patterns and challenges associated with manufacturing. Glycan variants can significantly affect the quality attributes requiring characterization throughout production. Successful penetration of biologics can drive down prices and this will be a welcome change for patients and the healthcare providers. Herein we review the biologic TNFα inhibitors, which are on the market, in development, and the challenges being faced by biosimilar manufacturers.

Biologic therapies for the treatment of hidradenitis suppurativa

Introduction: Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a chronic skin disorder characterized by inflammatory nodules, abscesses, and fistulae. Patients tend to present in young adulthood and are predominantly female. The pathogenesis of HS involves apopilosebaceous gland follicle occlusion and affected areas often occur where this type of gland predominates. Treatment selection depends on HS severity, which is included in different scoring systems. In recent years, biological therapies have been evaluated and used with increasing frequency in moderate-to-severe HS disease.Areas covered: This review focuses on biological therapies for HS as assessed in case reports, case series, and clinical trials. The efficacy, hidradenitis suppurativa scoring systems, and long-term results of these therapies are discussed depending on the studies' endpoints.Expert opinion: Adalimumab is currently the only FDA-approved HS biological therapy. Some patients do not experience treatment efficacy with adalimumab at 40 mg/week, which may result in increasing the dose or seeking other treatments. Infliximab is the next line of HS treatment with demonstrated efficacy. Other biological therapies being studied have demonstrated efficacy in small patient groups, but lack study power. Further studies may provide answers to seeking treatment options for patients who fail to improve on current standard HS treatment.

IBI303, a biosimilar to adalimumab, for the treatment of patients with ankylosing spondylitis in China: a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 equivalence trial

BACKGROUND

China approved adalimumab for the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis in 2013. However, the cost of the standard dose regimen exceeds ¥15 000 (around US$2250) per month, which is well beyond affordability for most Chinese patients. No biosimilars of adalimumab are available in China; IBI303 is a monoclonal antibody against TNFα that is currently in development. This study aimed to assess the clinical equivalence of IBI303 to adalimumab in patients with ankylosing spondylitis.

METHODS

This phase 3, multicenter, double-blind, parallel, randomised controlled equivalence trial was done in 20 centers across China. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either 40 mg of IBI303 or 40 mg of adalimumab as a subcutaneous injection every 2 weeks until week 22. Patients were eligible for inclusion if they were between 18 and 65 years old, fulfilled the 1984 Modified New York Criteria for ankylosing spondylitis, were non-responders, inadequate responders, or intolerant to treatment with NSAIDs for 4 or more weeks, and had active ankylosing spondylitis defined by two or more indicators of disease severity. The investigators, site staff, patients, sponsors, and the contract research organisation were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who met the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS) Response Criteria for a 20% improvement (ASAS20) at week 24 after treatment. Equivalence was established if the 95% CI of the difference in responses between groups was between -15% and 15%. Efficacy analyses were done in the full analysis population and in the per-protocol population. Safety analyses were done in all randomly assigned patients who received at least one drug dose. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02893254.

FINDINGS

Between Sept 22, 2016, and May 11, 2018, 438 patients were randomly allocated either to the biosimilar IBI303 group (n=220) or the adalimumab group (n=218). In the full analysis population, 165 (75%) of 220 patients in the IBI303 group (95% CI 68·7-80·6) and 158 (72%) of 218 patients in the adalimumab group (66·0-78·3) reached the primary outcome of ASAS20 at week 24. The difference between the two groups was 2·3% with a 95% CI of -5·9 to 10·6, which fell within the pre-specified equivalence boundaries at week 24 (-15 to 15). In the per-protocol population, 163 (80%) of 203 patients in the IBI303 group reached ASAS20 at week 24 (95% CI 74·1-85·5), compared with 150 (80%) of 188 patients in the adalimumab group (73·3-85·3%). The difference between the groups was 0·6% with a 95% CI of -7·4 to 8·6%, which also fell within the pre-specified equivalence boundaries at week 24. Safety and tolerability profiles were similar between the two groups; 174 (79%) of 220 patients in the IBI303 group and 178 (82%) of 218 patients in the adalimumab group had treatment-emergent adverse events.

INTERPRETATION

This trial showed therapeutic equivalence of IBI303 and adalimumab in the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis. The efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of both drugs are highly similar. IBI303 could be an alternative treatment option for patients with ankylosing spondylitis in China.

FUNDING

Innovent Biologics, National Major Scientific and Technological Special Project for "Significant New Drugs Development".