PF-06881894, a Proposed Biosimilar to Pegfilgrastim, Versus US-Licensed and EU-Approved Pegfilgrastim Reference Products (Neulasta®): Pharmacodynamics, Pharmacokinetics, Immunogenicity, and Safety of Single or Multiple Subcutaneous Doses in Healthy Volunteers

Efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of pegylated PEG-rhg-CSF in pediatric patients receiving high-intensity chemotherapy: results from a phase II study

Background

High-intensity chemotherapy can cause life-threatening complications in pediatric patients. Therefore, this study investigated safety and efficacy of long-acting pegylated recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (PEG-rhG-CSF; Jinyouli®) in children undergoing high-intensity chemotherapy.

Methods

Treatment-naive patients received post-chemotherapy PEG-rhG-CSF as primary prophylaxis for two cycles. The primary endpoints were drug-related adverse events (AEs) and bone pain scores. Secondary endpoints included grade 3-4 neutropenia, duration of neutropenia recovery, absolute neutrophil count changes, febrile neutropenia (FN), reduced chemotherapy intensity, antibiotic usage, and AE severity. The cost-effectiveness of PEG-rhG-CSF was compared with that of rhG-CSF (Ruibai®).

Results

Here, 307 and 288 patients underwent one and two PEG-rhG-CSF cycles, respectively. Ninety-one patients experienced drug-related AEs, primarily bone pain (12.7%). Moreover, Grade 3-4 neutropenia and FN were observed. Median FN durations were 3.0 days in both cycles. No drug-related delays were observed during chemotherapy. One patient experienced grade 4 neutropenia-induced reduction in chemotherapy intensity during cycle 2. In total, 138 patients received antibiotics. PEG-rhG-CSF exhibited superior cost-effectiveness compared to rhG-CSF.

Conclusion

Our findings indicate that PEG-rhG-CSF is safe, efficient, and cost-effective in pediatric patients undergoing high-intensity chemotherapy, providing preliminary evidence warranting further randomized controlled trials.

Achieving white blood cell equity: are the safety profiles of biosimilar and reference pegfilgrastims comparable?

Biosimilars can provide choices for patients and may provide cost savings; however, their uptake has been slow in the USA, in part due to limited knowledge. To provide additional confidence in US pegfilgrastim biosimilars, this narrative review compared the safety profiles of biosimilar pegfilgrastims, currently approved or filed for approval in the USA, with the EU- and US-approved reference pegfilgrastims. Headache and bone pain were common to biosimilars and reference products and occurred at a similar incidence. Clinical trial data on the safety profiles of biosimilar pegfilgrastims and reference products have demonstrated similarity and comparability, with no unexpected safety outcomes. Overall, the safety profiles of biosimilar pegfilgrastims and reference pegfilgrastims demonstrated a high degree of similarity and comparability.

Statins Increase the Bioavailability of Fixed-Dose Combination of Sofosbuvir/Ledipasvir by Inhibition of P-glycoprotein

BACKGROUND

Coadministration of statins and direct acting antiviral agents is frequently used. This study explored the effects of both atorvastatin and lovastatin on pharmacokinetics of a fixed-dose combination of sofosbuvir/ledipasvir "FDCSL".

METHODS

12 healthy volunteers participated in a randomized, three-phase crossover trial and were administered a single atorvastatin dose 80 mg plus tablet containing 400/90 mg FDCSL, a single lovastatin dose 40 mg plus tablet containing 400/90 mg FDCSL, or tablets containing 400/90 mg FDCSL alone. Liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry was used to analyze plasma samples of sofosbuvir, ledipasvir and sofosbuvir metabolite "GS-331007" and their pharmacokinetic parameters were determined.

RESULTS

Atorvastatin caused a significant rise in sofosbuvir bioavailability as explained by increasing in AUC0-∞ and Cmax by 34.36% and 11.97%, respectively. In addition, AUC0-∞ and Cmax of GS-331007 were increased by 73.73% and 67.86%, respectively after atorvastatin intake. Similarly, co-administration of lovastatin with FDCSL increased the bioavailability of sofosbuvir, its metabolite (AUC0-∞ increase by 17.2%, 17.38%, respectively, and Cmax increase by 12.03%, 22.24%, respectively). However, neither atorvastatin nor lovastatin showed a change in ledipasvir bioavailability. Hepatic elimination was not affected after statin intake with FDCSL. Compared to lovastatin, atorvastatin showed significant increase in AUC0-∞ and Cmax of both sofosbuvir and its metabolite.

CONCLUSIONS

Both atorvastatin and lovastatin increased AUC of sofosbuvir and its metabolite after concurrent administration with FDCSL. Statins' P-glycoprotein inhibition is the attributed mechanism of interaction. The increase in sofosbuvir bioavailability was more pronounced after atorvastatin intake. Close monitoring is needed after co-administration of atorvastatin and FDCSL.

Phase I/II study to assess the clinical pharmacology and safety of single ascending and multiple subcutaneous doses of PF-06881894 in women with non-distantly metastatic breast cancer

PURPOSE

To evaluate the pharmacodynamics (PD), pharmacokinetics (PK), and safety of single and multiple doses of PF-06881894 (pegfilgrastim-apgf; Nyvepria™), a biosimilar to reference pegfilgrastim (Neulasta®), in women with non-distantly metastatic breast cancer.

METHODS

In Phase I (Cycle 0) of this Phase I/II study, the PD response (absolute neutrophil count [ANC]; CD34 + count), PK profile, and safety of a single 3- or 6-mg subcutaneous dose of PF-06881894 were assessed in chemotherapy-naïve patients before definitive breast surgery. In Phase II (Cycles 1-4), the PD response (duration of severe neutropenia [DSN, Cycle 1], ANC [Cycles 1 and 4]) and PK profile (Cycles 1 and 4) of single and multiple 6-mg doses of PF-06881894 concomitant with chemotherapy and after definitive breast surgery were assessed.

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients (mean age 59 years) were enrolled (Cycle 0, n = 12; Cycles 1-4, n = 13). In Cycle 0, PD responses and PK values were lower with 3-mg versus 6-mg PF-06881894. In Cycles 1 and 4, mean DSN was 0.667 days after single or multiple 6-mg doses of PF-06881894, respectively. In Cycle 4 versus Cycle 1, PD responses were more robust; PK values (mean area under the curve, maximum concentration) were lower; and clearance values were higher. The safety profile of PF-06881894 was similar to that for reference pegfilgrastim.

CONCLUSION

PF-06881894 as a single 3- or 6-mg dose prior to definitive surgery, or multiple 6-mg/cycle doses postoperatively, with/without myelosuppressive chemotherapy, was consistent with the clinical pharmacology and safety profile of reference pegfilgrastim.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

October 2017. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02650193. EudraCT Number: 2015-002057-35.

Pegfilgrastim Biosimilars: Where Are We Now?

In 1991, the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) approved rmetHuGCSF for human use. This recombinant methionyl human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, or filgrastim, saw use in over 1 million patients in its first 5 years on the market. In 2002, the FDA approved a version of filgrastim with covalent linkage to a monomethoxypolyethylene glycol, increasing the molecular size and half-life to replace multiple days of dosing with a single injection. These medications remained standard of care for neutropenia until the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 created an abbreviated pathway to licensure for biologic products. Practitioners now have their pick of numerous and expanding options for pegfilgrastim biosimilars.

Analysis of the Regulatory Science Applied to a Single Portfolio of Eight Biosimilar Product Approvals by Four Key Regulatory Authorities

Slow uptake of biosimilars in some regions is often attributed to a lack of knowledge combined with concerns about safety and efficacy. To alleviate physician and patient apprehensions, regulatory reviews from four major regulatory authorities (RAs) (European Medicines Agency, US Food and Drug Administration, Health Canada, and Japan Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Authority) across a portfolio of eight biosimilars were analyzed to provide insight into RA review focus and approach. RA queries were evaluated in an unbiased and systematic manner by major classification (Chemistry, Manufacturing and Controls [CMC], nonclinical, clinical or regulatory) and then via detailed sub-classification. There was a consistent, predominant focus on CMC from all RAs. The review focus based on sub-classification of clinical and regulatory queries was influenced by molecular complexity, with significant differences between categories (monoclonal antibody or protein) in the distribution of query topics; specifically, bioanalytical (p = 0.023), comparative safety and efficacy (p = 0.023), and statutory (including the justification of extrapolation) (p = 0.00033). Each biosimilar had a distinct distribution of clinical query topics, tailored to product-specific data. This analysis elucidated areas of heightened RA interest, and validated their application of regulatory science in the evaluation of biosimilar safety and efficacy.

Biosimilar pegfilgrastim may offer affordable treatment options for patients in France: a budget impact analysis on the basis of clinical trial and real-world data

BACKGROUND

NYVEPRIA, a pegfilgrastim (a long-acting granulocyte colony-stimulating factor [G-CSF]) biosimilar, was recently recommended for marketing authorization in Europe for decreasing the incidence of febrile neutropenia (FN) in patients with non-myeloid malignancies receiving myelosuppressive anti-cancer drugs. The present study aimed to evaluate the financial impact of introducing a new pegfilgrastim biosimilar from a French healthcare system perspective.

METHODS

An Excel-based budget impact model was developed to estimate the financial impact by introducing a new pegfilgrastim biosimilar (NYVEPRIA) to France over a 5-year time horizon. Comparators included existing long-acting and short-acting G-CSFs. The burden of FN was obtained from existing literature. Costs (2021 Euros) included drug acquisition and administration, estimated based on drug dosage in both clinical trial and real-world settings. Scenario analyses were conducted to examine the robustness of key model assumptions.

RESULTS

In a total French population of 67.19 million, 79,873 patients were estimated to be treated with G-CSFs annually. The annual number of patients to be treated with NYVEPRIA was estimated to be 1593, 3195, 3674, 3782, and 4052 in years 1 to 5, respectively. Using real-world data, NYVEPRIA resulted in total annual cost savings of €8,620, €868,498, €868,498, €814,102, and €958,952 over years 1 to 5, respectively, leading to a cumulative 5-year cost savings of €3,518,669. Using data from clinical trials, NYVEPRIA resulted in total annual cost savings of €14,366, €1,447,496, €1,447,496, €1,356,836, and €1,598,253 over years 1 to 5, respectively, leading to a cumulative 5-year cost savings of €5,864,448.

CONCLUSIONS

The introduction of a new pegfilgrastim biosimilar (NYVEPRIA) is potentially associated with substantial cost savings for the French healthcare system.

Single-Dose Pharmacokinetics, Pharmacodynamics and Immunogenicity, and Multiple-Dose Immunogenicity of INTP5 (Pegfilgrastim Biosimilar) Versus Reference Pegfilgrastim in Healthy Subjects

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: INTP5 has been developed as a pegfilgrastim biosimilar. Single-dose, crossover study compared the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics (PK/PD) of INTP5 (pegfilgrastim biosimilar) with reference pegfilgrastim (Neulasta^®, pegfilgrastim-ref) and a multiple-dose, parallel-group study compared the immunogenicity of INTP5 with pegfilgrastim-ref in healthy subjects as part of a complete clinical development plan.

METHODS

In the PK/PD study, subjects received a single subcutaneous 6 mg dose of INTP5 and pegfilgrastim-ref (N = 142) separated by a 6-week washout period. The primary endpoints were area under the serum concentration-time curve measured from time zero to infinity (AUC_0-∞) and maximum measured serum concentration (C_max) of pegfilgrastim and area under the absolute neutrophil count (ANC) versus time curve from time zero to t (AUEC_0-t) and maximum measured ANC (E_max) of baseline non-adjusted ANCs. In the immunogenicity study, subjects received two 6 mg doses of INTP5 (N = 100) or pegfilgrastim-ref (N = 100) separated by 21 days. The primary endpoints were incidence of anti-drug antibodies (ADAs) in the two treatment groups.

RESULTS

The primary PK endpoints [AUC_0-∞ (90% CI 108.59-123.11) and C_max (106.24-118.99)] and the primary PD endpoints [AUEC_0-t (99.07-102.32) and E_max (100.24-104.25)] met the acceptance criteria of 80-125%. The incidence of ADAs was 10.6% in the INTP5 arm and 9.0% in the pegfilgrastim-ref arm. The 90% CI for risk difference of the ADA incidence between INTP5 and pegfilgrastim-ref was 1.64% (- 5.40 to 8.68) and was within the 10% margin. No neutralizing antibodies were reported. Immunogenicity did not impact PK/PD parameters and subjects with aberrant PK/PD/safety did not show immunogenicity concerns. Incidence of adverse events (AEs) was similar with INTP5 and pegfilgrastim-ref in both studies. The most common AEs were musculoskeletal pain and headache.

CONCLUSION

INTP5 showed PK/PD equivalence with pegfilgrastim-ref following a single dose, no clinically meaningful difference in the immune response following multiple doses, and a comparable safety profile.