Real-Life Use of Biosimilars in Pediatric Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Nation-Wide Web Survey on Behalf of the SIGENP IBD Working Group

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 pre-clinical, 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.

Dual-Targeted Therapy in Pediatric Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Comprehensive Review

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a chronic systemic immune-mediated disorder. The disease is triggered and perpetuated by a complex interplay between genetic predisposition, dysregulated immune responses, and environmental factors. Pediatric IBD is considered to be more aggressive compared with adult-onset IBD, and commonly requires more intensive pharmacological and surgical treatments. Although the use of targeted therapy, such as biologic therapy and small molecule therapy, is on the rise, there are children with IBD who are refractory to all current therapeutic options. For them, a combination of biologic agents or a biologic agent with small molecules as dual-targeted therapy (DTT) may be a possible therapeutic option. The main indications for DTT are high inflammatory burden and refractoriness to standard therapy, extra-intestinal manifestations of IBD, adverse effects of therapy, and co-existing immune-mediated inflammatory disorders. Several combination therapies were described for pediatric refractory IBD. The main ones were anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) agents and vedolizumab (VDZ), anti-TNF and ustekinumab (UST), VDZ and UST, and biologic agents with tofacitinib. DTT exhibits high efficacy, with high rates of clinical response and remission as well as biomarker remission. The data on endoscopic and radiologic remission are scarce. Most of the adverse effects reported under DTT were mild; however, the serious ones that had been observed mandate a profoundly cautious approach when considering it. Triple immunosuppressive therapy and combinations of biologics with emergent therapies such as selective Janus kinase inhibitors, sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor modulators, and anti-interleukin-23 agents, are potential future regimens for children with IBD who are refractory to current therapeutic options. This review provides an update of publications on these issues.

Biosimilars in Pediatric IBD: Updated Considerations for Disease Management

Biologic drugs have significantly modified the pharmacological management of several chronic conditions, including inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). By contrast, in the last two decades, biologics have been associated with increased direct medical costs. As patents for the reference drugs have expired, the development and commercialization of biosimilars through abbreviated licensing pathways represented an affordable alternative in patients fulfilling the indication for biologics. A growing body of evidence, first in adults and then in the pediatric age group too, has provided reassuring data in terms of efficacy and safety of biosimilars both in naïve patients and in those previously on reference drugs who had to switch to the biosimilar. This review summarizes the currently available evidence for biosimilar use in IBD, with a focus on pediatric IBD. The most common practical approaches to biosimilar use in the pediatric clinical settings are also discussed.

Biosimilars in Pediatric Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: A Systematic Review and Real Life-Based Evidence

Background: Many pediatric inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients are now using biosimilars of anti-tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), with increasing trends in recent years. This study reviewed all available data regarding the use of biosimilars in children with IBD.

Methods: PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, and CENTRAL databases were searched through keywords; inflammatory bowel diseases, Crohn’s disease, ulcerative colitis, biosimilar and child were combined using “AND” and “OR.” Original research articles involving pediatric patients receiving one of the biosimilar medications based on the anti-TNF-α biologic drugs approved for pediatric IBD treatment, independently from efficacy and drug response, were included.

Results: Nine studies were included in the evidence synthesis. CT-P13 was the biosimilar used in all studies. Four studies assessed the induction effectiveness of CT-P13. Clinical response and remission rates of biosimilar treatment were 86–90% and 67–68%, respectively, and they were not significantly different to the originator group. Five prospective studies on patients elected to switch from originator IFX to CT-P13 yielded similar results. Adverse events related to CT-P13 were mostly mild. The most frequently reported were upper respiratory tract infections. The switch from the originator had no significant impact on immunogenicity.

Conclusion: The current review showed reported CT-P13 effectiveness as measured by clinical response and/or remission rates after induction or during maintenance and suggest that there is no significant difference with that of the originator IFX. Further studies are warranted, including clinical, and pharmacovigilance studies.