A place for biosimilars in the changing multiple sclerosis treatment landscape

Comparative immunogenicity assessment of biosimilar natalizumab to its reference medicine: a matching immunogenicity profile

Background

Biosimilar natalizumab (biosim-NTZ) is the first biosimilar monoclonal antibody of reference natalizumab (ref-NTZ) for treatment of relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis (MS). Within the totality of evidence for demonstration of biosimilarity, immunogenicity assessments were performed in healthy subjects and patients with relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) to confirm a matching immunogenicity profile between biosim-NTZ and ref-NTZ.

Methods

Immunogenicity of biosim-NTZ versus ref-NTZ was evaluated in two pivotal clinical studies. In a comparative efficacy and safety study, patients with RRMS (n=264) received monthly infusions of biosim-NTZ/EU-ref-NTZ over 48 weeks. The primary endpoint period was Week 0 to Week 24. In a separate, comparative pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) study, healthy subjects (n=450) received a single dose of biosim-NTZ, US-ref-NTZ or EU-ref-NTZ prior to an 85-day follow-up. In both studies, state-of-the-art, highly sensitive and drug tolerant bioanalytical assays were used to identify the proportion of participants with anti-drug antibodies (ADA) and neutralizing antibodies (NAb) against natalizumab over time.

Results

In the comparative efficacy and safety study, biosim-NTZ and EU-ref-NTZ demonstrated similar incidences of overall ADA (79.4% vs 73.7%, respectively) and NAb (68.7% vs 66.2%, respectively) at Week 24. ADA titers over time were also concordant throughout the study period. Switching treatment from EU-ref-NTZ to biosim-NTZ had no impact on treatment-related ADA/NAb or clinical responses. Likewise, the single-dose PK/PD study reported matching overall incidence of ADA between treatment groups and matching ADA titer profiles over time.

Conclusion

The immunogenicity profile of biosim-NTZ was confirmed to match that of ref-NTZ in healthy subjects and patients with RRMS by applying highly sensitive methods.

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].

Evaluating efficacy and safety of ocrelizumab biosimilar (Xacrel) compared to the originator (Ocrevus) in relapsing multiple sclerosis: a phase III, randomized, equivalency, clinical trial

Multiple sclerosis is an inflammatory demyelinating disease and represents a global health concern. Ocrelizumab, a humanized IgG monoclonal antibody, selectively targets CD20 on B cells and CD20-expressing T cells. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of the biosimilar ocrelizumab candidate (Xacrel) to the originator product (Ocrevus) in Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis (RMS) patients. In this randomized trial, patients received either Xacrel or Ocrevus for 96 weeks. The primary endpoint was the equivalency of the medications in reducing the annualized relapse rate (ARR) at week 48. The secondary endpoints included time to the onset of disability progression confirmed at 12 and 24 weeks, the proportion of relapse-free patients, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) evaluations, safety assessments, and immunogenicity over 96 weeks. A total of 170 patients were randomized (1:1 ratio). In the per protocol analysis, the upper and lower limits of 95% two-sided confidence intervals of difference between treatments in the 48-week ARR rate were in the predefined margin of - 0.2 to 0.2 (- 0.002; 95% CI - 0.080 to 0.075). The two products were also comparable in terms of other efficacy parameters, safety, and immunogenicity. The results confirmed that Xacrel is equivalent to Ocrevus in terms of 48-week ARR in RMS patients, with no considerable difference in other efficacy parameters and the safety profile during the 96 weeks. The trial was registered in Iranian registry of clinical trials (IRCT) on 10/06/2019 with the registration number of IRCT20150303021315N13 and in Clinicaltrials.gov on 19/07/2021 with the registration code of NCT04966338.

Cost and effectiveness of autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation and high-efficacy disease-modifying therapies in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis

BACKGROUND

Autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (AHSCT) is a highly effective one-off treatment for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RR-MS), potentially representing an optimal front-loading strategy for costs.

OBJECTIVE

Exploring cost/effectiveness of AHSCT and high-efficacy disease-modifying treatments (HE-DMTs) in RR-MS, estimating costs at our centre in Italy, where National Health Service (NHS) provides universal health coverage.

METHODS

Costs (including drugs, inpatient/outpatient management) for treatment with AHSCT and HE-DMTs were calculated as NHS expenditures over 2- and 5-year periods. Cost-effectiveness for each treatment was estimated as "cost needed to treat" (CNT), i.e. expense to prevent relapses, progression, or disease activity (NEDA) in one patient over n-years, retrieving outcomes from published studies.

RESULTS

Costs of AHSCT and HE-DMTs were similar over 2 years, whereas AHSCT was cheaper than most HE-DMTs over 5 years (€46 600 vs €93 800, respectively). When estimating cost-effectiveness of treatments, over 2 years, mean CNT of HE-DMTs for NEDA was twofold that of AHSCT, whereas it was similar for relapses and disability. Differences in CNT were remarkable over 5 years, especially for NEDA, being mean CNT of HE-DMTs €382 800 vs €74 900 for AHSCT.

CONCLUSIONS

AHSCT may be highly cost-effective in selected aggressive RR-MS. Besides priceless benefits for treated individuals, cost-savings generated by AHSCT may contribute to improving healthcare assistance at a population level.

Drugs Targeting CD20 in Multiple Sclerosis: Pharmacology, Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability

Currently, there are four monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) that target the cluster of differentiation (CD) 20 receptor available to treat multiple sclerosis (MS): rituximab, ocrelizumab, ofatumumab, and ublituximab. B-cell depletion therapy has changed the therapeutic landscape of MS through robust efficacy on clinical manifestations and MRI lesion activity, and the currently available anti-CD20 mAb therapies for use in MS are a cornerstone of highly effective disease-modifying treatment. Ocrelizumab is currently the only therapy with regulatory approval for primary progressive MS. There are currently few data regarding the relative efficacy of these therapies, though several clinical trials are ongoing. Safety concerns applicable to this class of therapeutics relate primarily to immunogenicity and mechanism of action, and include infusion-related or injection-related reactions, development of hypogammaglobulinemia (leading to increased infection and malignancy risk), and decreased vaccine response. Exploration of alternative dose/dosing schedules might be an effective strategy for mitigating these risks. Future development of biosimilar medications might make these therapies more readily available. Although anti-CD20 mAb therapies have led to significant improvements in disease outcomes, CNS-penetrant therapies are still needed to more effectively address the compartmentalized inflammation thought to play an important role in disability progression.