Overview of Humira® Biosimilars: Current European Landscape and Future Implications

Modelling the opportunity for cost-savings or patient access with biosimilar adalimumab and tocilizumab: a European perspective

Objectives: Biosimilars improve patient access by providing cost-effective treatment options. This study assessed the potential savings and expanded patient access with increased use of two biosimilar disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs): a) approved adalimumab biosimilars and b) the first tocilizumab biosimilar, representing an established biosimilar field and a recent biosimilar entrant in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom (UK).Methods: Separate ex-ante analyses were conducted for each country, parameterized using country-specific list prices, unit volumes annually, and market shares for each therapy. Discounting scenarios of 10%, 20%, and 30% were tested for tocilizumab. Outputs included direct cost-savings associated with drug acquisition or the incremental number of patients that could be treated if savings were redirected. Two biosimilar conversion scenarios were tested.Results: Savings associated with a 100% conversion to adalimumab biosimilar ranged from €10.5 to €187 million (UK and Germany, respectively), or an additional 1,096 to 19,454 patients that could be treated using the cost-savings. Introduction of a tocilizumab biosimilar provided savings up to €29.3 million in the most conservative scenario. Exclusive use of tocilizumab biosimilars (at a 30% discount) could increase savings to €28.8 to €113 million or expand access to an additional 43% of existing tocilizumab users across countries.Conclusion: This study demonstrates the benefits that can be realized through increased biosimilar adoption, not only in an untapped tocilizumab market, but also through incremental increases in well-established markets such as adalimumab. As healthcare budgets continue to face downwards pressure globally, strategies to increase biosimilar market share could prove useful to help manage financial constraints.

Clinical outcomes of switching to adalimumab biosimilar (MSB11022) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: RESTART Spanish Registry

OBJECTIVE

MSB11022 is a biosimilar of adalimumab that has been shown comparable bioequivalence, safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity profiles to the reference adalimumab in healthy volunteers or in patients with psoriasis or rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This is the first study conducted under clinical practice conditions evaluating the switch from reference adalimumab to MSB11022 in patients with RA.

METHODS

Retrospective and multicenter study with data from the medical records of patients with RA who switched from reference adalimumab or another biosimilar to MSB11022 and maintained this treatment for at least 6 months. Information registered comes from baseline visit, the moment of the switch, and the follow-up visits.

RESULTS

Data from 86 patients were evaluated (median age 63.5 years, 75.6% female, 44.2% had erosive RA). Only 3.5% of the patients received biologic therapy prior to adalimumab. At baseline, median DAS28-CRP was 1.77 (80.2% in remission and 96.5% with low disease activity) and median CDAI was 4.00 (44.2% in remission and 90.7% with low disease activity). After a median follow-up of 8 months, median DAS28-CRP was 1.87 (86.0% in remission and 94.2% with low disease activity) and median CDAI was 4.00 (38.5% in remission and 95.3% with low disease activity). Only three patients experienced pain, swelling, and stinging at the injection site or a locally extensive hematoma in the area of administration.

CONCLUSIONS

Adalimumab biosimilar MSB11022 maintained the efficacy benefits provided by previous adalimumab treatments with a safety profile in line with that already described for other biosimilars.

Pharmaceutical and biotech industry perspectives on optimizing patient experience and treatment adherence through subcutaneous drug delivery design

Subcutaneous (SC) drug delivery can be a safe, effective alternative to the traditional intravenous route of administration, potentially offering notable advantages for both patients and healthcare providers. The SC Drug Development & Delivery Consortium convened in 2018 to raise awareness of industry challenges to advance the development of patient-centric SC drug delivery strategies. The SC Consortium identified better understanding of patient preferences and perspectives as necessary to optimize SC product design attributes and help guide design decisions during SC product development. This manuscript provides a comprehensive overview of patient-centric factors for consideration in the SC drug delivery design and development process with the aim of establishing a foundation of existing knowledge for patient experiences related to SC drug delivery. This overview is informed by the outcomes of a multi-step survey of Consortium members and key pharmaceutical stakeholders. Framed in the context of the patient's treatment journey, the survey findings offer future perspectives to fill data gaps to advance patient-centric SC drug delivery.

Golimumab and certolizumab pegol for the treatment of hidradenitis suppurativa: a literature review and future perspective

Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is an inflammatory skin condition with an underlying inflammatory process. Due to the limited efficacy of available treatments, HS remains a therapeutic challenge. The safety and efficacy of tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) inhibitors, adalimumab, infliximab, and etanercept, are well studied in this patient population, and in some cases, HS was unresponsive to them. In recent years, evidence has been growing regarding the application of other anti-TNFs, including certolizumab pegol (CPZ) and golimumab. We sought to evaluate the overall safety and efficacy of golimumab and CPZ in the management of HS. A comprehensive search was performed on the PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Ovid Embase databases, as well as the Google Scholar search engine from initiation to 31 August 2023. A total of nine and four studies used CPZ and golimumab to treat HS, respectively. Individuals with concomitant inflammatory immune-mediated diseases, pregnant females, and patients who were refractory to previous treatments achieved a Hidradenitis Suppurativa Clinical Response following CPZ administration. Also, golimumab showed promise in treating recalcitrant HS after the failure of other treatments, such as adalimumab and anti-interleukin-1. CPZ and golimumab can be efficacious treatment options for moderate-to-severe HS, especially in patients who are unresponsive to other TNF inhibitors, such as adalimumab.

Effects of non-medical infliximab biosimilar switching in ocular inflammatory diseases: A case series from a tertiary care center

PURPOSE

To describe the course of care and outcomes for 3 uveitis patients formerly on Remicade that were non-medically switched to Inflectra.

DESIGN

Retrospective observational case series.

METHODS

•Setting: Tertiary care clinical practice.•Patient population: 3 Uveitis patients, observing both eyes for inflammation as applicable. Patients included if they had been on Inflectra for ≥2 infusions and history of Remicade use. Patients described herein had at least 1 adverse reaction to Inflectra and were switched to Remicade for medical necessity. Patients excluded if they were lost to follow-up or not examined for over 6 months during therapy.•Observation procedures/Interventions: Patients observed for adverse changes in clinical course while on Inflectra. Patients developing these changes on Inflectra were started or restarted on Remicade.

RESULTS

The 3 patients described herein developed adverse complications while on Inflectra that required switching to Remicade. They were originally on Remicade, and their clinical course worsened beyond what had been controlled with Remicade alone. Our findings are limited by our small sample size, and further investigation is necessary to explore the scope of effects of non-medical biosimilar switching.

CONCLUSION

Non-medical biosimilar switching from Remicade to Inflectra may induce detrimental side-effects and significant worsening of inflammation in patients with uveitis. Non-medical biosimilar switching from Remicade to Inflectra should be discouraged, and physician input should be sought in establishing an effective and medically-necessary treatment plan for patients with uveitis.

Challenges for further successful development of tumor necrosis factor targeting therapies for uveitis

INTRODUCTION

Uveitis is a heterogeneous group of ocular conditions characterized by inflammation of the uveal tract and is one of the leading causes of vision impairment. In developed countries, noninfectious uveitis (NIU) represents most cases and is challenging to treat due to its severity, chronicity, and high recurrence rates. The advent of anti-tumor necrosis factor-α (anti-TNF-α) agents have dramatically improved outcomes and changed treatment paradigms in NIU.

AREAS COVERED

The index article summarizes the present experience of anti-TNF-α agents in NIU pharmacotherapy and highlights the barriers to further research and development of anti-TNF-α agents for uveitis. Common challenges faced in NIU clinical drugs trials, specific difficulties in anti-TNF-α drug development, and promising competitor drug candidates are discussed and evaluated.

EXPERT OPINION

Anti-TNF-α agents have revolutionized NIU pharmacotherapy and greatly improved outcomes with good safety profiles. The great success of systemic infliximab and adalimumab in NIU treatment has resulted in little impetus for further development of this class of medication. Attempts have been made to deliver anti-TNF-α agents intravitreally but that has not been successful thus far. With expiring patents, competition from biosimilars and newer, novel molecules, it may not be viable to continue pursuing anti-TNF-α drug development.

Is the Availability of Biosimilar Adalimumab Associated with Budget Savings? A Difference-in-Difference Analysis of 14 Countries

OBJECTIVE

The aim was to assess the influence of the presence of biosimilar adalimumab on adalimumab budget savings in 14 high- and upper-middle-income countries.

METHODS

This study analyzed Multinational Integrated Data Analysis System (MIDAS)-IQVIA data from the fourth quarter (Q4) of 2018 to the Q4 of 2019, comparing adalimumab expenditure (in United States dollars) and consumption (in standard units [SU]) across 14 countries (Australia, Austria, Brazil, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Korea, Singapore, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, and Taiwan). The countries were divided into two groups based on the availability of adalimumab biosimilars during the study period. A difference-in-difference design was employed to analyze the groups, focusing on changes from Q4 2018 to Q4 2019. Additionally, changes in adalimumab expenditure were decomposed into price, quantity, and drug mix during the study period.

RESULTS

Among countries with adalimumab biosimilars, there was a significant decrease in expenditure (- $371.0 per gross domestic product per capita; p = 0.03) over four quarters, while the consumption significantly increased (1.0 SU per 1000 population; p = 0.02). This was consistent with visual observations and differed from countries without adalimumab biosimilar. Sensitivity analysis with a narrowed list of countries (12 high-income countries) showed a consistent trend. Adalimumab expenditure decreased by 14% during the study period in countries where adalimumab biosimilars were available, mainly due to the price changes (Pt = 0.85; - 15%) and the drug-mix effect (εt  = 0.88; - 12%). Yet, adalimumab expenditure (Et = 1.04; +4%) changed in a quantity-dependent manner (Qt = 1.06; +6%) in countries where adalimumab biosimilars were absent.

CONCLUSION

The availability of biosimilars was associated with a decrease in adalimumab expenditure without compromising the consumption of adalimumab.

Measuring the impact of monoclonal antibody therapies

Objective

Monoclonal antibody (Mab) treatments have significantly improved the quality and quantity of life, but they are some of the most expensive treatments, resulting in a degree of hesitancy to introduce new Mab agents. A system for estimating the effect of Mab drugs, in general, would optimally inform health strategy and fully realize how a single scientific discovery can deliver health benefits. We evaluated such a method with several well-established Mab regimens.

Methods

We selected five different Mab regimens in oncology and rheumatology in England. We carried out two systematic literature reviews and meta-analyses to assess health outcomes (Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index for rheumatoid arthritis; overall mortality for melanoma) from real-world data and compared them to the outcomes from randomized control trials (RCTs). We applied economic modeling to estimate the net monetary benefits for health outcomes for the estimated patient population size for each Mab regimen.

Results

Meta-analyses of 27 eligible real-world data (RWD) sets and 26 randomized controlled trial (RCT) sets found close agreement between the observed and expected health outcomes. A Markov model showed the net positive monetary benefit in three Mab regimens and the negative benefit in two regimens. However, because of limited access to NHS data, the economic model made several assumptions about the number of treated patients and the cost of treatment to the NHS, the accuracy of which may affect the estimation of the net monetary benefit.

Conclusion

RCT results reliably inform the real-world experience of Mab treatments. Calculation of the net monetary benefit by the algorithm described provides a valuable overall measure of the health impact, subject to the accuracy of data inputs. This study provides a compelling case for building a comprehensive, systematized, and accessible database and related analytics, on all Mab treatments within health services.

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.

Navigating adalimumab biosimilars: an expert opinion

The patent expiry of Humira® in 2018 opened up the current European market to eight adalimumab biosimilars - (in alphabetical order) Amgevita®, Amsparity®, Hulio®, Hukyndra®, Hyrimoz®, Idacio®, Imraldi® and Yuflyma® - for the treatment of various immune and inflammatory conditions. Amjevita, Hadlima®, Hyrimoz and Yuflyma have recently become available in the USA, with others expected to reach this market in 2023 as the US patent protection for Humira ends. Although adalimumab biosimilars demonstrate efficacy, safety and immunogenicity similar to the originator, they may differ in product excipient(s) and preservatives, along with their device type(s). Physicians may find it both difficult and time consuming to navigate their way among the array of available adalimumab biosimilars when they need to make a treatment decision. This article explores the characteristics of various adalimumab biosimilars to help clinicians navigate the various options available across Europe and the USA. In addition to drug selection, effective patient-physician communication is needed to nurture realistic patient expectations and minimise potential nocebo effects when prescribing biosimilars.

IgG glycans in health and disease: Prediction, intervention, prognosis, and therapy

Immunoglobulin (IgG) glycosylation is a complex enzymatically controlled process, essential for the structure and function of IgG. IgG glycome is relatively stable in the state of homeostasis, yet its alterations have been associated with aging, pollution and toxic exposure, as well as various diseases, including autoimmune and inflammatory diseases, cardiometabolic diseases, infectious diseases and cancer. IgG is also an effector molecule directly involved in the inflammation processes included in the pathogenesis of many diseases. Numerous recently published studies support the idea that IgG N-glycosylation fine-tunes the immune response and plays a significant role in chronic inflammation. This makes it a promising novel biomarker of biological age, and a prognostic, diagnostic and treatment evaluation tool. Here we provide an overview of the current state of knowledge regarding the IgG glycosylation in health and disease, and its potential applications in pro-active prevention and monitoring of various health interventions.

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.

Self-reported efficacy and safety of infliximab and adalimumab biosimilars after non-medical switch in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: results of a multicenter survey

BACKGROUND

Few data are available on subjective disease control and perception of adverse events (AEs) during switching from original anti-TNF agents to biosimilars.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Hungarian patients with inflammatory bowel disease were interviewed after a mandatory non-medical switch from an infliximab (IFX) originator to a biosimilar GP1111 or from an adalimumab (ADA) originator to a biosimilar GP2017. Drug choice was based on patient's and physician's decision. Subjective efficacy was measured using a 10-point scale, and AEs were assessed. Difference in efficacy before and after the switch was compared within and between the drugs.

RESULTS

Seventy-three ADA and 106 IFX switching patients were interviewed. Subjective efficacy of IFX biosimilar was rated lower compared to IFX originator (8.72 ± 1.68 vs. 7.77 ± 2.34; p = 0.001). The ADA biosimilar was rated higher than its originator (9.02 ± 1.61 vs. 8.42 ± 1.93; p = 0.017). Patients receiving ADA biosimilar were more satisfied with the new treatment compared to IFX (p = 0.032). The incidence of new AEs was 85% in the ADA and 55% in the IFX group (1.79 vs. 0.93 AEs per patient, respectively, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Subjective efficacy of switching to a biosimilar was proven in case of ADA, while reduced efficacy was experienced with IFX biosimilar. Perception of AEs was high and varied between biosimilars.

A multicenter, randomized, open-label, 2-arm parallel study to compare the pharmacokinetics, safety and tolerability of AVT02 administered subcutaneously via prefilled syringe or autoinjector in healthy adults

BACKGROUND

AVT02 is an adalimumab biosimilar, with bioequivalence previously established along with clinical similarity. This study assessed the pharmacokinetic (PK) similarity of a single dose of 100 mg/mL AVT02 administered via prefilled syringe (PFS) or autoinjector (AI).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

In this open-label, 2-arm, parallel-group study, healthy adults were randomized 1:1 to receive one 40 mg (100 mg/mL) dose of AVT02 subcutaneously via PFS (N = 102) or AI (N = 105). Primary PK parameters (Cmax, AUC0-t and AUC0-inf) were evaluated up to Day 64 of the study. Secondary PK parameters, safety, tolerability and immunogenicity were also assessed.

RESULTS

The 90% CIs for the ratio of geometric least squares means were contained within the pre-specified 80-125% equivalence margins for the primary PK parameters, demonstrating bioequivalence of AVT02 when administered by PFS or AI. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was comparable between the two groups, with a low frequency of injection site reactions observed. Immunogenicity profiles were also similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Bioequivalence was demonstrated for a single dose of AVT02 administered via PFS or AI. These results will help to increase availability of devices for patients, enabling treatment choice and flexibility.

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.

The cost of inflammatory bowel disease in high-income settings: a Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology Commission

The cost of caring for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) continues to increase worldwide. The cause is not only a steady increase in the prevalence of Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis in both developed and newly industrialised countries, but also the chronic nature of the diseases, the need for long-term, often expensive treatments, the use of more intensive disease monitoring strategies, and the effect of the diseases on economic productivity. This Commission draws together a wide range of expertise to discuss the current costs of IBD care, the drivers of increasing costs, and how to deliver affordable care for IBD in the future. The key conclusions are that (1) increases in health-care costs must be evaluated against improved disease management and reductions in indirect costs, and (2) that overarching systems for data interoperability, registries, and big data approaches must be established for continuous assessment of effectiveness, costs, and the cost-effectiveness of care. International collaborations should be sought out to evaluate novel models of care (eg, value-based health care, including integrated health care, and participatory health-care models), as well as to improve the education and training of clinicians, patients, and policy makers.

Current Medical and Surgical Treatment of Hidradenitis Suppurativa-A Comprehensive Review

Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease presenting with recurrent inflammatory lesions in intertriginous body regions. HS has a pronounced impact on patients' quality of life and is associated with a variety of comorbidities. Treatment of HS is often complex, requiring an individual approach with medical and surgical treatments available. However, especially in moderate-to-severe HS, there is an urgent need for new treatment approaches. In recent years, increased research has led to the identification of new potential therapeutic targets. This review aims to give a comprehensive and practical overview of current treatment options for HS. Furthermore, the clinically most advanced novel treatment approaches will be discussed.

Increase recombinant antibody yields through optimizing vector design and production process in CHO cells

Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) cells are the most commonly used host cells for the production of recombinant monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) due to their several advantages. Although the yields of recombinant mAbs can be greatly increased by some strategies, such as medium formulation, culture conditions, and cell engineering, most studies focused on either upstream design or downstream processes. In the present study, we first expressed recombinant adalimumab through combination of the vector design and production process optimization in CHO cells. Bicistronic vector, monocistronic vector, and dual promoter vector were constructed, and the production process was optimized using low-temperature and fed-batch culture. The results showed that the dual promoter vector exhibited the highest yield under the transient and stable transfected cells among three different vector systems in CHO cells. In addition, low-temperature and fed-batch culture could further improve the yields of adalimumab. The purified antibody displayed tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) binding activity. In conclusion, combination of expression vector design and production process optimization can achieve higher expression of recombinant mAbs in CHO cells. KEY POINTS: • The dual promoter vector is more effective for expressing recombinant antibodies. • The yields of antibodies are related to the LC chain expression level. • Low-temperature and feed addition can promote antibody production.

Stepping Forward to the Next Level: Totality of Evidence for the First High-Concentration Adalimumab Biosimilar, CT-P17

Biosimilar regulatory evaluation considers the totality of evidence gathered through analytical, non-clinical and clinical studies. CT-P17 is the first high-concentration (100 mg/mL), citrate-free adalimumab biosimilar to receive regulatory approval in Europe for all indications held by reference adalimumab, following comprehensive non-clinical and clinical development programmes. State-of-the art physicochemical and biological methods demonstrated quality, analytical and functional comparability between CT-P17 and reference adalimumab; non-clinical in vivo studies supported biosimilarity. Three phase I and two phase III studies were conducted, with pharmacokinetic equivalence of CT-P17 and reference adalimumab shown in healthy volunteers, and equivalent efficacy demonstrated in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Safety and immunogenicity profiles were comparable between CT-P17 and reference adalimumab across studies. CT-P17 is available for administration by autoinjector/prefilled pen (AI/PFP), prefilled syringe (PFS) and PFS with needle guard, providing diverse self-injection options for patients. Equivalent pharmacokinetics and comparable overall safety and usability were demonstrated between AI/PFP and PFS devices during the clinical development programme. All CT-P17 devices include fine, 29-gauge needles; combined with the citrate-free, high-concentration formulation, these characteristics reflect the newer reference adalimumab formulation (100 mg/mL) and are associated with reduced injection-site pain. The high-concentration formulation also facilitates treatment delivery via fewer injections. Compared with reference adalimumab, CT-P17 remains stable for longer at room temperature, enhancing ease of storage for patients and healthcare providers. In summary, the totality of evidence supports the biosimilarity of CT-P17 to high-concentration reference adalimumab, and several distinctive features differentiate it from existing adalimumab biosimilars.

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.

Toward the integration of biosimilars into pediatric rheumatology: adalimumab ABP 501 experience of PeRA research group

OBJECTIVES

To review the real-life data, to provide an input to the literature concerning treatment of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) with adalimumab (ADL) biosimilar.

METHOD

This multi-centric retrospective study was conducted among children with JIA, followed up for at least 24-weeks from the initiation of ADL biosimilar (ABP 501) treatment. Adverse events and alterations in disease activity scores were figured out.

RESULTS

The median age of the group was 15.5 (5-18) years. JIA categories were oligoarticular (n =12), enthesitis-related (ERA) (n=24), psoriatic (PsA) (n=6), and polyarticular (n=4). Uveitis was detected at the initiation of the disease (n=3), during the disease course (n=5), or before the diagnosis (n=1). The first-line treatment preferences were ADL biosimilar (n=37) and etanercept (n=9). On the 6th month of ABP 501, 40 (86.9%) patients had achieved complete remission. Six patients (1 PsA, 1 polyarticular JIA, and 4 ERA) had ongoing active arthritis. Furthermore, all except one of the patients had remission of ophthalmologic findings. No life-threatening adverse events were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

ABP 501 has a gradual increase in prescription in pediatric rheumatology. Real-life data of the cohort announce that ADL biosimilar is a suitable and effective treatment option for patients with JIA in case of indication.

Rapid intensification of an established CHO cell fed-batch process

Currently, the mammalian biomanufacturing industry explores process intensification (PI) to meet upcoming demands of biotherapeutics while keeping production flexible but, more importantly, as economic as possible. However, intensified processes often require more development time compared with conventional fed‐batches (FBs) preventing their implementation. Hence, rapid and efficient, yet straightforward strategies for PI are needed. In this study we demonstrate such a strategy for the intensification of an N‐stage FB by implementing N‐1 perfusion cell culture and high inoculum cell densities resulting in a robust intensified FB (iFB). Furthermore, we show successful combination of such an iFB with the addition of productivity enhancers, which has not been reported so far. The conventional CHO cell FB process was step‐wise improved and intensified rapidly in multi‐parallel small‐scale bioreactors using N‐1 perfusion. The iFBs were performed in 15 and 250 ml bioreactors and allowed to evaluate the impact on key process indicators (KPI): the space–time yield (STY) was successfully doubled from 0.28 to 0.55 g/L d, while product quality was maintained. This gain was generated by initially increasing the inoculation density, thus shrinking process time, and second supplementation with butyric acid (BA), which reduced cell growth and enhanced cell‐specific productivity from ~25 to 37 pg/(cell d). Potential impacts of PI on cell metabolism were evaluated using flux balance analysis. Initial metabolic differences between the standard and intensified process were observed but disappeared quickly. This shows that PI can be achieved rapidly for new as well as existing processes without introducing sustained changes in cellular and metabolic behavior.