Adalimumab Biosimilars in the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Systematic Review of the Evidence for Biosimilarity

Forty-Eight-Month Monitoring of Disease Activity in Patients with Long-Standing Rheumatoid Arthritis Treated with TNF-α Inhibitors: Time for Clinical Outcome Prediction and Biosimilar vs Biologic Originator Performance

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Long-term treatment of patients with rheumatoid arthritis with tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors leads to initial changes in disease activity that can predict a late treatment response. This observational and retrospective study aimed to determine when it is possible to foresee the response to therapy in the case of long-standing rheumatoid arthritis comparing also the efficacy of the original biologics with their biosimilars.

METHODS

A total of 1598 patients were recruited and treated with the original biologics, adalimumab and etanercept, or with biosimilars. Patients were monitored over a period of 48 months and disease activity scores (28-Joint Disease Activity Score, Simplified Disease Activity Index, and Clinical Disease Activity Index) were measured every 6 months.

RESULTS

No differences in disease activity levels were observed in etanercept versus biosimilars (GP2015/SB4) and adalimumab versus biosimilar (GP2017) patient groups. All scores significantly decreased in all treatments during the first 18 months of therapy, and after 24 months reached a minimum that lasted up to 48 months.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that biosimilars of adalimumab and etanercept have equivalent effectiveness over a long period of time compared to their originator drugs, and also that the levels of disease activity after 6 months of tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors (originator drugs and biosimilars) might predict the response to therapy at 4 years in patients with long-standing rheumatoid arthritis.

The PROPER Study: A 48-Week, Pan-European, Real-World Study of Biosimilar SB5 Following Transition from Reference Adalimumab in Patients with Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Disease

BACKGROUND

The non-interventional PROPER study generated real-world evidence on clinical outcomes following transition in routine practice from reference adalimumab to the EMA-approved SB5 biosimilar adalimumab in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory disease.

METHODS

Adults with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), Crohn's disease (CD), or ulcerative colitis (UC) were enrolled at 63 sites across Europe. Eligible patients received ≥ 16 weeks of routine treatment with reference adalimumab before transitioning to SB5, and were followed for 48 weeks post-transition. The primary objective was to evaluate candidate predictors (clinically relevant baseline variables with incidence ≥ 15% by indication cohort) associated with persistence on SB5 at 48 weeks post-initiation. Key primary outcome measures were persistence on SB5 (estimated by Kaplan-Meier methodology) and clinical characteristics and disease activity scores at the time of transition to SB5 treatment (baseline).

RESULTS

A total of 955 eligible patients were enrolled (RA, n = 207; axSpA, n = 127; PsA, n = 162; CD, n = 447; UC, n = 12), of whom 932 (97.6%) completed follow-up and 722 (75.6%) were still receiving SB5 at week 48. Kaplan-Meier estimates (95% confidence interval, CI) of persistence on SB5 at week 48 for RA, axSpA, PsA, and CD were 0.86 (0.80-0.90), 0.80 (0.71-0.86), 0.81 (0.74-0.86), and 0.72 (0.67-0.76), respectively. The single candidate predictor associated with probability of SB5 discontinuation before week 48 was female sex [RA, axSpA, and CD cohorts; HR (95% CI): 3.53 (1.07-11.67), 2.38 (1.11-5.14), and 2.21 (1.54-3.18), respectively]. Disease activity scores remained largely unchanged throughout the study, with proportions by cohort in remission at baseline versus week 48 being 59.2% versus 57.2%, 81.0% versus 78.0%, 94.7% versus 93.7%, and 84.0% versus 85.1% for patients with RA, axSpA, PsA, and CD, respectively. Similarly, the SB5 dosing regimen remained unchanged for the majority of patients from baseline to week 48, the most common regimen being 40 mg every 2 weeks. In total, 232 patients (24.3%) reported at least one adverse drug reaction, and most events were mild; eight patients (3.9%) in the RA cohort experienced nine serious adverse events (SAEs; two possibly related to SB5); eight patients (4.9%) in the PsA cohort experienced nine SAEs (one possibly related to SB5); 22 patients (4.9%) in the CD cohort experienced 27 SAEs (four possibly related to SB5); and no SAEs were observed in the UC cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

With the exception of female sex in RA, axSpA, and CD, none of the candidate predictors were associated with SB5 discontinuation. Persistence on SB5 was high, treatment effectiveness was maintained, and no safety signals were detected.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04089514.

Consensus statement on the use of biosimilar drugs in immune-mediated diseases in Spain

OBJECTIVE

To improve knowledge about biosimilar medicines and to generate a consensus framework on their use.

METHODS

Qualitative study. A multidisciplinary group of experts in biosimilar medicines was established (1dermatologist, 1hospital pharmacist, 1rheumatologist, and 1gastroenterologist) who defined the sections and topics of the document. A narrative literature review was performed in Medline to identify articles on biosimilar medicines. Systematic reviews, controlled, pre-clinical, clinical, and real-life studies were selected. Based on the results of the review, several general principles and recommendations were generated. The level of agreement was tested in a Delphi that was extended to 66 health professionals who voted from 1 (totally disagree) to 10 (totally agree). Agreement was defined if at least 70% of the participants voted ≥7.

RESULTS

The literature review included 555 articles. A total of 10 general principles and recommendations were voted upon. All reached the level of agreement established. The document includes data on the main characteristics of biosimilar medicines (definition, development, approval, indication extrapolation, interchangeability, financing, and traceability); published evidence (biosimilarity, efficacy, effectiveness, safety, immunogenicity, efficiency, switch); barriers and facilitators to its use; and data on information for patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Authorized biosimilar medicines meet all the characteristics of quality, efficacy, and safety. They also significantly help improve patient access to biological therapies and contribute to health system sustainability.

Multiple switching between the biosimilar adalimumab PF-06410293 and reference adalimumab in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis: a phase 3, open-label, randomised, parallel-group study

BACKGROUND

An adalimumab biosimilar with an interchangeability designation could increase access to effective treatment for more patients. We aimed to assess the interchangeability of adalimumab biosimilar PF-06410293 (adalimumab-afzb) and reference adalimumab using a multi-switch study design.

METHODS

We did an open-label, randomised, parallel-group study at 61 community (n=29), hospital (n=12), and academic (n=20) sites in ten countries (Bulgaria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Czech Republic, Lithuania, Poland, Russia, Serbia, South Africa, Ukraine, and USA). Eligible patients were aged 18-70 years and met the 2010 American College of Rheumatology-European League Against Rheumatism classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis for at least 4 months with moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis, based on their physician's evaluation. Eligible patients had been receiving methotrexate for at least 12 weeks and been on a stable dose for at least 4 weeks before the first dose of study medication. All patients received subcutaneous reference adalimumab (40 mg/0·4 mL [100 mg/mL] every 2 weeks) for 10 weeks before randomisation. At week 10, patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either three switches between subcutaneous reference adalimumab (40 mg/0·4 mL [100 mg/mL] every 2 weeks) and adalimumab-afzb (40 mg/0·8 mL [50 mg/mL] every 2 weeks; switching group), or continuous dosing with subcutanous reference adalimumab (40 mg/0·4 mL [100 mg/mL] every 2 weeks; non-switching group) with stratification by bodyweight groups. Patients, investigators, and site personnel were not masked to treatment allocation. Primary endpoints were maximum observed serum concentration (Cmax) and area under plasma concentration-time curve (AUCτ) during weeks 30-32 in the pharmacokinetic population. Interchangeability was based on geometric mean ratios and corresponding 90% CIs within prespecified equivalence margins of 80-125% for both primary endpoints. Safety was analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of adalimumab-afzb or reference adalimumab. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04230213.

FINDINGS

Of the 569 patients assessed for eligibility between Jan 13, 2020, and June 22, 2021, 445 were enrolled, and 427 completed the first 10 weeks and were randomly assigned (213 to the switching group and 214 to the non-switching group). Participants had a median age of 56 years (IQR 46-63), 354 (83%) of 427 patients were women and 73 (17%) were men, and 422 (99%) were White. In the pharmacokinetic population (n=380), no clinically meaningful differences were observed in mean steady-state pharmacokinetic parameters between the switching and non-switching groups (geometric mean AUC 2237 μg × h/mL in the switching group and 2125 μg × h/mL in the non-switching group; Cmax 8·21 μg/mL in the switching group and 8·00 μg/mL in the non-switching group). Geometric mean ratios and 90% CIs for AUCτ (105·31, 89·16-124·39) and Cmax (102·56, 89·78-117·17) were within prespecified equivalence margins. No meaningful differences were observed in the proportion of patients who had serious adverse events (three [1%] of 213 patients in the switching group vs eight [4%] of 214 patients in the non-switching group), grade 3 or higher adverse events of special interest, discontinuations due to adverse events (eight [4%] vs nine [4%]), or immunogenic reactions in antidrug antibody-positive patients. No deaths were reported during the study.

INTERPRETATION

The risk of multiple switches between reference adalimumab and adalimumab-afzb with respect to diminished efficacy (using pharmacokinetics as a surrogate) or safety is not greater than the risk of using reference adalimumab alone.

FUNDING

Pfizer. VIDEO ABSTRACT.

Real-life data on efficacy and safety of original Adalimumab and biosimilar Adalimumab (ABP 501) in pediatric rheumatic diseases

BACKGROUND

We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of the original product (OP) and biosimilar product (BP) of adalimumab in pediatric rheumatic diseases.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

The study group consisted of patients who had received original or biosimilar adalimumab (ABP 501) therapy for at least 3 months. The patients were divided into uveitis and arthritis groups based on the indication of adalimumab treatment. Assessment of disease activity was performed by Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score in patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis, and by standardization of uveitis nomenclature criteria in patients with uveitis.

RESULTS

The study included 140 patients, of which 87 were treated with OP and 53 with BP. In the arthritis group, 26 (63.4%) and 20 (57.1%) patients reached inactive disease according to JADAS-27 in the original and biosimilar adalimumab groups, respectively. In the uveitis group the mean number of exacerbations throughout the treatment period was 0.84 ± 1.07 in the OP group, and 0.58 ± 0.79 in the BP group. There were 71 treatment-emergent adverse events in the OP group and 38 in the BP group.

CONCLUSION

There was no significant difference between the biosimilar and the original product in efficacy and safety.

Biosimilars in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: a pharmacokinetic overview

INTRODUCTION

As of May 2023, 19 and 18 biosimilars have been approved for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and United States Food and Drug Administration (US FDA) respectively.

AREA COVERED

Pharmacokinetic results of phase 1 studies of approved biosimilars were reviewed by systematic literature search. The impact of immunogenicity on the pharmacokinetic data and clinical response was assessed, and the potential benefit of monitoring serum concentrations of biologic drugs is discussed. The advantage of subcutaneous CT-P13 (an infliximab biosimilar) in clinical practice is reviewed.

EXPERT OPINION

Biosimilars are approved based on the totality of evidence including comparable physiochemical properties, PK / PD profiles, and clinical efficacy and safety to the originator. To utilize biosimilars more effectively, physicians should be aware of the utility of combination DMARD therapy to reduce immunogenicity and maintain efficacy and PK profile. PK monitoring, however, is not currently recommended in clinical practice. CT-P13 subcutaneous (SC) is the first SC infliximab used for treatment of RA patients. Based on data from clinical studies and the real world, SC-infliximab is an attractive therapeutic option compared to IV formulations of infliximab based on its efficacy, pharmacokinetics, patient-reported outcomes, and safety profile.

Current and emerging prospects in the psoriatic treatment

Psoriasis is an autoimmune chronic disorder that causes inflammation and a scaly epidermis. The exact pathogenesis of the disease is not known yet. According to the studies, psoriasis is considered an immune-mediated disease. Until now it is believed that genetic and environmental factors are responsible for the disease. There are many comorbidities associated with psoriasis which increases difficulties as patients in some cases get addicted to drugs, alcohol, and smoking which reduces their quality of life. The patient may face social ignorance or suicidal thoughts which may arise in the patient's mind. Due to the undefined trigger of the disease, the treatment is not fully established but by considering the severe impact of the disease researchers are focusing on novel approaches for successful treatment. which has succeeded to a large extent. Here we review pathogenesis, problems faced by psoriatic patients, the need for the development of new treatments over conventional therapies, and the history of psoriatic treatments. We thoroughly focus on emerging treatments like biologics, biosimilars, and small molecules which are now showing more efficacy and safety than conventional treatments. Also, this review article discusses novel approaches which are now in research such as drug repurposing, treatment by stimulation of the vagus nerve, regulation of microbiota, and autophagy for improving disease conditions.

Outcomes Following Adalimumab Bio-originator to Biosimilar Switch-A Comparison Using Real-world Patient- and Physician-Reported Data in European Countries

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this work is to compare real-world outcomes of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) receiving adalimumab (ADA) bio-originator (non-switchers) to those who had switched from ADA bio-originator to an ADA biosimilar (switchers) on the basis of the hypothesis that these outcomes would differ.

METHODS

Data were drawn from the Adelphi RA Disease Specific Programme™, a point-in-time survey of physicians and their patients in Europe (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, UK) in 2020. Physicians completed a questionnaire for their next ten adult patients with RA, followed by four additional patients who had switched from ADA bio-originator to an ADA biosimilar (switchers). Physician- and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for switchers and non-switchers were compared by propensity score matching.

RESULTS

Three hundred and three rheumatologists provided data for 160 non-switchers and 225 switchers, 140 patients provided data; 51 non-switchers, 89 switchers. According to physician-reported disease activity, non-switchers were more likely to improve on their current ADA treatment than switchers (68%, n = 108 vs. 26%, n = 59 p < 0.001) and less likely to worsen (1%, n = 2 vs. 9%, n = 20; p < 0.01). Physician-reported patient adherence was significantly lower amongst switchers versus non-switchers (0.66 vs. 0.78, respectively; p = 0.04). More non-switchers than switchers were reported by their physicians to be consistent in taking their RA medicine (p < 0.001). Compared with non-switchers, PRO measures indicated quality of life was worse (EQ-5D Visual Analogue Scale: 62.9 vs. 71.9; p < 0.001) and activity impairment was greater (Work Productivity Activity Index: 31.0 vs. 24.4; p = 0.02) for switchers, with trends for poorer health status and greater pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Non-medical switching in RA treatment may lead to unforeseen outcomes that should be considered by health decision-makers.

Safety and efficacy of bimekizumab through 2 years in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis: longer-term results from the BE SURE randomized controlled trial and the open-label extension from the BE BRIGHT trial

BACKGROUND

BE SURE 1-year results demonstrated the superior efficacy of bimekizumab compared with adalimumab with no unexpected safety findings.

OBJECTIVES

To provide efficacy and safety data over 2 years of bimekizumab treatment compared with adalimumab from BE SURE and the BE BRIGHT open-label extension (OLE) in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis.

METHODS

The 56-week double-blinded BE SURE phase III randomized controlled trial randomized patients 1 : 1 : 1 to bimekizumab 320 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W), bimekizumab 320 mg Q4W to week 16 then every 8 weeks (Q8W), or adalimumab 40 mg every 2 weeks to week 24 then bimekizumab 320 mg Q4W. After completing BE SURE, patients could enter the ongoing BE BRIGHT OLE, with possible dosing adjustments based on Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI). The primary outcome in BE BRIGHT was incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs); safety data are reported by study period through week 104. Efficacy data are reported for the intention-to-treat population through week 104 by initial randomization group, with ≥ 90% improvement from baseline PASI (PASI 90) and 100% improvement (PASI 100) as key outcomes.

RESULTS

Of the patients randomized to bimekizumab, 158 were assigned to Q4W, and 161 to Q4W/Q8W. At week 104, PASI 90 was achieved by 91.2% and 89.7%, and PASI 100 was achieved by 72.3% and 68.1%, for Q4W and Q4W/Q8W, respectively; comparable to week 16 results. Among the 159 patients randomized to adalimumab, responses rapidly and substantially increased after the week 24 bimekizumab switch; at week 104, 96.9% and 70.2% of patients achieved PASI 90 and PASI 100 respectively. Through weeks 24-104, the three most common TEAEs in any bimekizumab-treated group were nasopharyngitis, oral candidiasis and upper respiratory tract infection. Rates of serious TEAEs were low.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical responses observed through week 16 of BE SURE in patients randomized to bimekizumab were sustained through 104 weeks of treatment, regardless of Q4W or Q8W maintenance dosing. Response rates were also sustained through week 104 in patients who switched from adalimumab to bimekizumab at week 24, and were similar to those observed in the bimekizumab groups. Bimekizumab was well tolerated with no new safety signals.

Efficacy of synthetic and biological DMARDs: a systematic literature review informing the 2022 update of the EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVES

To update the evidence on efficacy of DMARDs (disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs) and inform the taskforce of the 2022 update of the European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) recommendations for management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

This systematic literature review (SLR) investigated the efficacy of conventional synthetic (cs), biological (b), biosimilar and targeted synthetic (ts)DMARDs in patients with RA. Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL and Web of Science were used to identify all relevant articles published since the previous update in 2019 to 14 January 2022.

RESULTS

Of 8969 search results, 169 articles were selected for detailed review and 47 were finally included. Trials investigated the efficacy of csDMARDs, bDMARDs and tsDMARDs, DMARD switching, tapering and trials investigating different treatment strategies. The compounds investigated were csDMARDs (methotrexate (MTX), leflunomide, sulfasalazine, hydroxychloroquine), bDMARDs (abatacept, adalimumab, certolizumab-pegol, denosumab, etanercept, infliximab, levilimab, olokizumab, opineracept, rituximab, sarilumab, tocilizumab) and tsDMARDs (baricitinib, filgotinib, tofacitinib, upadacitinib). The efficacy of csDMARDs+ short-term glucocorticoids in early RA was confirmed and similar to bDMARD+MTX combination therapy. Interleukin-6 pathway inhibition was effective in trials on olokizumab and levilimab. Janus kinase inhibitor (JAKi) was efficacious in different patient populations. After insufficient response to JAKi, patients could respond to TNFi treatment. Tapering of DMARDs was feasible for a proportion of patients, who were able to taper therapy while remaining in low disease activity or remission.

CONCLUSION

The results of this SLR, together with one SLR on safety of DMARD and one on glucocorticoids, informed the taskforce of the 2022 update of the EULAR recommendations for pharmacological management of RA.

Comparison of Efficacy and Safety of Original and Biosimilar Adalimumab in Active Rheumatoid Arthritis in a Real-World National Cohort

Background and Objectives: Real-world evidence should reflect the evidence obtained from controlled trials; therefore, the study aimed to compare biosimilar adalimumab (bADA) to original adalimumab (oADA) in terms of efficacy and safety in a real-life national cohort of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients. Materials and Methods: The following study is a prospective observational study in which we analyzed patients treated with reimbursed biologics from the Romanian Registry of Rheumatic Diseases (RRBR). RA cases must fulfill the 2010 classification criteria, as well as specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. The RRBR database was queried for all RA patients starting oADA or bADA (FKB327, GP2017, MSB11022, SB5 available) from 2 May 2019 (the first bADA initiation) until 26 March 2022 (study search date). Results: The study included 441 patients who started oADA (48.3%) or bADA (51.7%) in the same time period. At baseline, patients starting bADA had a significantly higher mean age and lower prevalence of women. After the first six months of treatment, there were no significant differences between the oADA and bADA regarding rates of Boolean (15.0% vs. 12.3%, p = 0.401), DAS28-CRP (32.4% vs. 34.2%, p = 0.686) and SDAI (16.4% vs. 14.0%, p = 0.483) remission rates. There were 107 cases of adverse events (AE): 81.3% on oADA and 18.7% on bADA. Notably, 51.4% of AE were infections. Regarding severity, 49.5% of AEs were mild, 34.6% were moderate, and 15.9% were severe. Conclusion: Biosimilar adalimumab showed similar efficacy and safety to original adalimumab after the first six months of treatment in RA patients from a national registry.

The potential role of ischaemia-reperfusion injury in chronic, relapsing diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis, Long COVID, and ME/CFS: evidence, mechanisms, and therapeutic implications

Ischaemia–reperfusion (I–R) injury, initiated via bursts of reactive oxygen species produced during the reoxygenation phase following hypoxia, is well known in a variety of acute circumstances. We argue here that I–R injury also underpins elements of the pathology of a variety of chronic, inflammatory diseases, including rheumatoid arthritis, ME/CFS and, our chief focus and most proximally, Long COVID. Ischaemia may be initiated via fibrin amyloid microclot blockage of capillaries, for instance as exercise is started; reperfusion is a necessary corollary when it finishes. We rehearse the mechanistic evidence for these occurrences here, in terms of their manifestation as oxidative stress, hyperinflammation, mast cell activation, the production of marker metabolites and related activities. Such microclot-based phenomena can explain both the breathlessness/fatigue and the post-exertional malaise that may be observed in these conditions, as well as many other observables. The recognition of these processes implies, mechanistically, that therapeutic benefit is potentially to be had from antioxidants, from anti-inflammatories, from iron chelators, and via suitable, safe fibrinolytics, and/or anti-clotting agents. We review the considerable existing evidence that is consistent with this, and with the biochemical mechanisms involved.

The economic burden of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in rheumatoid arthritis patients in the United States

BACKGROUND

Previous U.S. economic burden estimates for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) varied from $85.6 to 148.1 billion annually. However, these estimates do not reflect comparative amounts spent on RA treatment options in addition to other medical expenditures. Therefore, this study's goal was to comparatively analyze the overall economic burden of U.S. patients treated for RA using conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) versus TNF alpha biologic DMARDs.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This retrospective observational study analyzed Medical Expenditure Panel Survey Household Component data from 2016 to 2018. Healthcare utilization, total medical expenditures, and out-of-pocket expenditures were compared between RA medication groups.

RESULTS

Three hundred twenty-five adult RA patients experiencing 603 RA-related events, including at least one medical visit, between 2016 and 2018 were identified. Rheumatic arthritis-attributable medical expenditures among patients prescribed DMARDs were $11.4 billion. Average total medical expenditures were significantly higher for the TNF alpha biologic group $26,216.67 (95% CI: $19,502.84-$32,930.5) versus $5,388.52 (95% CI: $2,768.25-$8,008.79) for the conventional DMARD group (p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

RA patients receiving TNF alpha biologics experienced significantly higher total medical and out-of-pocket expenditures; however, they have experienced fewer or no occurrences of high-cost drivers of healthcare utilization compared to patients receiving conventional DMARDs.

HLX11, a Proposed Pertuzumab Biosimilar: Pharmacokinetics, Immunogenicity, and Safety Profiles Compared to Three Reference Biologic Products (US-, EU-, and CN-Approved Pertuzumab) Administered to Healthy Male Subjects

Background

Pertuzumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody for the treatment of breast cancer. HLX11 is a biosimilar of pertuzumab developed by Shanghai Henlius Biotech, Inc. We conducted a bioequivalence study for HLX11 and pertuzumab (United States [US]-, European Union [EU]-, and China [CN]-approved products).

Objectives

This study compared the biosimilarity in pharmacokinetics (PK), safety, and immunogenicity between HLX11 and reference pertuzumab (approved in the US, the EU, and CN) in healthy Chinese male participants after a single infusion and further characterized the PK profile of HLX11.

Methods

Eligible individuals were randomized 1:1:1:1 to receive a single dose of 420 mg HLX11, US-, EU-, or CN-pertuzumab via intravenous infusion over 60 min. The primary endpoints were maximum serum drug concentration (C_max), area under the serum concentration–time curve (AUC) from time 0 to time of the last quantifiable concentration (AUC_0–t), and AUC from time 0 to infinity (AUC_0–∞). PK bioequivalence was established if the 90% confidence intervals (CIs) of the geometric mean ratios of the primary endpoints were between 80.0 and 125.0%. Secondary endpoints included other PK parameters, safety, and immunogenicity.

Results

A total of 160 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to each group (n = 40 per group). The 90% CIs of the geometric mean ratios of the primary endpoints were all within the prespecified equivalence margins (HLX11 vs. pertuzumab [US-, EU-, CN-approved products]: C_max 97.03–115.06%, 91.39–109.80%, 94.53–110.65%; AUC_0–t 87.65–99.68%, 87.07–100.79%, 86.29–101.09%; AUC_0–∞ 87.66–99.90%, 87.54–101.05%, 89.23–103.20%). The incidence of adverse drug reactions was comparable across the four groups. The presence of anti-drug antibodies or neutralizing antibodies had no obvious effect on PK.

Conclusion

The PK, safety, and immunogenicity of HLX11 were highly similar to those of reference pertuzumab (US-, EU-, CN-approved products). The established bioequivalence supports further clinical trials of HLX11 in cancer treatment.

Trial Registration

This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04411550) and Chinadrugtrials.org.cn (CTR20200618).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40259-022-00534-w.

Regulatory Evaluation of Biosimilars: Refinement of Principles Based on the Scientific Evidence and Clinical Experience

The World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines on evaluation of similar biotherapeutic products (SBPs; also called biosimilars) were adopted by the WHO Expert Committee on Biological Standardization (ECBS) in 2009. In 2019, the ECBS considered that a more tailored and potentially reduced clinical data package may be acceptable in cases where this was clearly supported by the available scientific evidence. The goal of this publication is to review the current clinical experience and scientific evidence and to provide an expert perspective for updating the WHO guidelines to provide more flexibility and clarity. As the first step, the relevant guidelines by other regulatory bodies were reviewed in order to identify issues that might help with updating the WHO guidelines. Next, a literature search was conducted for information on the long-term efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of biosimilars to identify possible long-term problems. Finally, a search for articles concerning the role of clinical studies in the benefit-risk evaluation of biosimilars was conducted. The analysis of other guidelines suggested that the WHO guidelines may need more emphasis on the importance of the state-of-the-art physicochemical and structural comparability exercise and in vitro functional testing. The use of "foreign" reference product will also need clarifications. The value of in vivo toxicological tests in the development of biosimilars is questionable, and the non-clinical part needs revisions accordingly. The concepts of "totality of evidence," "stepwise development," and "residual uncertainty" were applied in the evaluation of the clinical sections of the guideline. The review of long-term safety and efficacy demonstrated the robustness of the current biosimilar development concept. The analysis of the roles of different development phases suggested that the large efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity studies are, in most cases, redundant. The residual uncertainty of safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy of biosimilars that has shaped the current regulatory guidelines is now substantially reduced. This will allow the re-evaluation of the non-clinical and clinical requirements of the current WHO main guideline. The shift of the relative impact of the development phases towards physico-chemical and in vitro functional testing will provide a relief to the manufacturers and new challenges to the regulators.

Tailored first-line biologic and targeted synthetic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: 2021 updated ITABIO statements

INTRODUCTION

In 2015, the Italian board for the TAilored BIOlogic therapy (ITABIO) proposed evidence-based decisional statements for first-line tailored biologic therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Taking into account the new licensed drugs, the aim of the present review was to update the previous statements.

AREAS COVERED

A narrative review of the most recent evidence on the efficacy and safety of old and newly licensed drugs for the treatment of articular and extra-articular RA was performed. In addition, host-related variables potentially driving the therapy choice, such as the infection risk, the cardiovascular risk, the risk of deep vein thrombosis, thromboembolism, pregnancy, and obesity were analyzed. Consequently, several statements for personalized therapy were formulated, thus providing a decisional algorithm useful for proper personalized therapy of RA patients in clinical practice.

EXPERT OPINION

Several clinical variables related to specific drug and host characteristics may drive the choice toward anti-TNF and non-anti-TNF biologics, or anti-JAKs, thus allowing to personalize the therapy. Consequently, the right therapy for the right patient would ensure a successful therapeutic intervention.

Assessment of Functional Characterization and Comparability of Biotherapeutics: a Review

The development of monoclonal antibody (mAb) biosimilars is a complex process. The key to their successful development and commercialization is an in-depth understanding of the key product attributes that impact safety and efficacy and the strategies to control them. Functional assessment of mAb is a crucial part of the comparability of biopharmaceutical drugs. The development of a relevant and robust functional assay requires an interdisciplinary approach and sufficient flexibility to balance regulatory concerns as well as dynamics and variability during the manufacturing process. Although many advanced tools are available to study and compare the potency and bioactivity of the protein, most of these techniques suffer from major shortcomings that limit their routine use. These include the complexity of the task, establishment of the relevance of the chosen method with the mechanism of action (MOA) of the biosimilar, cost and extended time of analysis, and often the ambiguity in interpretation of the resulting data. To overcome or to address these challenges, the use of multiple orthogonal state-of-the-art techniques is a necessary prerequisite.

An update on the adalimumab biosimilar landscape following the approval of the first high-concentration biosimilar

Biosimilars can reduce healthcare costs and expand patient access to biologic therapies. Currently, eight adalimumab biosimilars have received regulatory approval from the EMA and/or the US FDA. Following recent EMA approval of the first high-concentration adalimumab biosimilar, CT-P17, this review provides a contemporary update on adalimumab biosimilars currently licensed in Europe and the USA. The totality of evidence from each clinical development program is summarized, and characteristics of each formulation and/or device that potentially affect the convenience of treatment for patients are discussed. Future perspectives are considered, including the potential impact of the FDA's first interchangeability designation for an adalimumab biosimilar, ahead of their entry into the US marketplace in 2023.

Disease modification in ankylosing spondylitis with TNF inhibitors: spotlight on early phase clinical trials

INTRODUCTION

Ankylosing spondylitis (AS) is a chronic inflammatory disease whose main hallmark is involvement of the axial skeleton. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are the first line treatment; however, their use is limited because of side effects. Tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) are a safe and effective therapy, and they have been approved for the management of AS.

AREAS COVERED

This is a review of the efficacy of TNFi in disease modification in AS. It is focused on results from early-phase clinical trials; however, it also discusses the most relevant findings in order to optimize anti-TNF treatment. A literature search was done using PubMed, Medline, Embase, Google Scholar, and Cochrane library, looking for scientific publications from inception to August 2021. Further information was retrieved from ClinicalTrial.gov and Clinicaltrialsregister.eu.

EXPERT OPINION

TNFi have demonstrated short- and long-term improvements in all aspects of disease activity, as well as physical function in patients with AS. They have drastically revolutionized the management of the disease; and even though new drugs have become available in the market, TNFi has not been displaced for the treatment of AS, and still constitute the best alternative when NSAIDs are no-longer an option.

[Use of biosimilars in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis : An overview]

In der Therapie der rheumatoiden Arthritis sind seit ca. 20 Jahren Biologika ein fester Bestandteil. Da Arzneimittelpatente in der Regel nach 10 Jahren auslaufen, wurden in den letzten Jahren Biosimilars auf den Markt gebracht. In vielen Studien konnte gezeigt werden, dass sie bei vergleichbarer Sicherheit und Effektivität eine gleichwertige Alternative zum Referenzarzneimittel darstellen. In manchen Fällen zeigten sich sogar geringere Raten an unerwünschten Arzneimittelwirkungen im Vergleich zu den Referenzarzneimitteln. Weiterhin können durch Biosimilars erhebliche Kosten eingespart werden, die sich allein in Deutschland auf einen jährlichen dreistelligen Millionenbetrag belaufen. Dabei lassen sich große regionale Unterschiede bei der Verschreibungshäufigkeit von Biosimilars in Deutschland ausmachen, die sich auch im Einsparungspotenzial widerspiegeln. Eine Umstellung auf ein Biosimilar ist unter Einbezug des Patienten gut möglich und auch erwünscht. In diesem Sinne ist auch die Erstverschreibung eines Biosimilars statt des Referenzarzneimittels zu befürworten.

Management of Rheumatoid Arthritis: An Overview

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a multifactorial autoimmune disease of unknown etiology, primarily affecting the joints, then extra-articular manifestations can occur. Due to its complexity, which is based on an incompletely elucidated pathophysiological mechanism, good RA management requires a multidisciplinary approach. The clinical status of RA patients has improved in recent years due to medical advances in diagnosis and treatment, that have made it possible to reduce disease activity and prevent systemic complications. The most promising results were obtained by developing disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs), the class to which conventional synthetic, biologic, and targeted synthetic drugs belong. Furthermore, ongoing drug development has led to obtaining molecules with improved efficacy and safety profiles, but further research is needed until RA turns into a curable pathology. In the present work, we offer a comprehensive perspective on the management of RA, by centralizing the existing data provided by significant literature, emphasizing the importance of an early and accurate diagnosis associated with optimal personalized treatment in order to achieve better outcomes for RA patients. In addition, this study suggests future research perspectives in the treatment of RA that could lead to higher efficacy and safety profiles and lower financial costs.

OBSIDIAn - real world evidence of Originator to BioSImilar Drug switch in juvenile idiopathic arthritis

OBJECTIVES

Limited data about use of biosimilars are available in children with Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis (JIA). This study therefore aimed to evaluate long-term efficacy and safety of switching from etanercept (ETA) and adalimumab (ADA) originators to their biosimilars, in children with JIA, in a real-world setting.

METHODS

This is a retro-prospective non-interventional multicentre Italian comparative cohort study. Medical charts of JIA children treated with biosimilars of ETA or ADA were included. Efficacy and safety of TNF-inhibitors therapy was evaluated at last follow-up during originator and at 3, 6 and 12 months following the switch to biosimilar.

RESULTS

59 children (42 female, median age at onset 88 months) were treated with biosimilar of ETA (21) and ADA (38). Forty-five switched from the originator to the BIO (17 ETA, 28 ADA). At time of switch, 12/17 patients on ETA and 18/28 on ADA were in remission. No significant difference has been found at 3, 6 and 12 months after the switch. Ten patients discontinued biosimilars due to disease remission (4 ETA, 3 ADA), family willing (1 ETA), occurrence of burning at injection site (1 ETA), and persistent activity (1 ADA). No statistically significant difference was observed between originator and BIOs, nor between originator and BIOs, and between ADA and ETA in time to disease remission achievement, time to relapse and number of patients who experienced AE.

CONCLUSION

Our real-life results seem to confirm the efficacy and safety profile of switching from originator of ADA and ETA to their respective BIOs also in paediatric patients with JIA.

Equivalence and switching between biosimilars and reference molecules in rheumatoid arthritis: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Biologic drugs such as adalimumab, etanercept, and infliximab represent major first-line and second-line treatments for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients. However, their high cost poses a massive burden on healthcare systems worldwide. The expiration of patents for these biologics has driven the production of biosimilar drugs, which are potentially less costly and remarkably similar, albeit not identical to the reference molecules. This paper aims to outline the protocol of a systematic review that will investigate the efficacy and safety profile of biosimilars compared to biologics (objective 1) and the impact of switching between biosimilar drugs and reference biologics on the management of RA patients (objective 2).

METHODS

We will investigate the effects of any biosimilars of adalimumab, etanercept, and infliximab on RA patients. We will include randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs to assess efficacy and safety outcomes and RCTs with two- or multiple-part designs to evaluate the consequences of switching from reference biologics to biosimilar drugs (and vice-versa). Electronic searches will be performed through MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE, LILACS, and CENTRAL (from inception to April 2021). Two independent reviewers will screen studies, extract data, and evaluate the risk of bias. The latter will be carried out considering specific domains from equivalence trials and switching studies. Random-effects models will be fitted to obtain summary estimates using either relative risk or standardized mean difference as a metric. The primary outcome will be the rate of treatment success according to the American College of Rheumatology 20 (ACR20), and the co-primary outcome will be the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI). Conclusions will be based on equivalence hypothesis testing using predefined margins of equivalence elicited from a group of experienced rheumatologists and prior studies. The overall certainty of the evidence will be assessed based on the GRADE system.

DISCUSSION

The present investigation proposes a comprehensive, clinician-oriented approach to assess the equivalence and the impact of switching between biosimilars and biologics on the management of patients with RA. Our results will elucidate the efficacy, safety, immunogenicity of biosimilars, and the clinical consequences of substituting biologics with biosimilars in the management of RA.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42019137152 and CRD42019137155.

Adalimumab-Induced Rhupus Syndrome in a Female Patient Affected with Anti-Citrullinated Protein Antibody (ACPA)-Positive Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA): A Case Report and Review of Literature

We report a 38-year-old female patient affected with anti-citrullinated protein antibody (ACPA)-positive rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who developed mild hemolytic anemia (Hb = 10.5 vs. >12 gr/dL), indolent oral ulceration, ANA (1:1280, homogeneous pattern), and anti-dsDNA antibody positivity following 8 months of therapy with an adalimumab biosimilar (GP2017). Rhupus syndrome was diagnosed. Replacing GP2017 with infliximab, anemia, oral ulcer, and anti-dsDNA antibodies quickly disappeared, while low-titers (1:80) ANA are still present after more than a year. The possibility that the patient suffered from rhupus rather than drug-induced lupus erythematosus associated to anti-ACPA positivity RA was discussed. To date, after a 14-month follow-up, no manifestations of LE have reappeared. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report of adalimumab-induced rhupus.