Clinical Efficacy of Biosimilar Switch of Adalimumab for Management of Uveitis

Anterior uveitis for the comprehensive ophthalmologist

Anterior uveitis presents a diagnostic challenge due to its wide array of etiologies and clinical manifestations. This narrative review aims to equip general ophthalmologists with a comprehensive understanding of anterior uveitis epidemiology, diagnosis, and treatment. Particular emphasis is placed on developing a tailored and stepwise strategy, rather than a one-size-fits-all approach, for the workup and treatment of anterior uveitis. Chest radiography and serologic testing for syphilis, human leukocyte antigen B27, and angiotensin-converting enzyme are appropriate routine investigations in cases of severe, bilateral, recurrent, or chronic anterior uveitis. Additional testing should be guided by clinical findings and regional epidemiology, especially when considering expensive and invasive modalities. Investigations that are obtained in the absence of clinical and epidemiologic orientation are of limited utility and incur significant costs to patients and health care systems. Most cases of anatomically isolated anterior uveitis resolve with topical corticosteroids, but some patients require escalation to systemic immunomodulatory therapy (IMT). IMT should be considered in patients who respond poorly to corticosteroids, develop side effects related to corticosteroids that limit their use, require high doses to maintain disease remission, or have concomitant systemic inflammatory disease. Comprehensive ophthalmologists should feel comfortable comanaging patients that require conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs/antimetabolite therapy (i.e., methotrexate, azathioprine, and mycophenolate mofetil) with rheumatologists and providing guidance on ocular dosing. When uveitis quiescence cannot be achieved despite maximally tolerated antimetabolite therapy, patients should be referred to a uveitis specialist for consultation and consideration of IMT escalation. The timing of uveitis referral may depend on local factors specific to health care jurisdictions.

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.

Effectiveness and Safety of Biosimilars in Pediatric Non-infectious Uveitis: Real-Life Data from the International AIDA Network Uveitis Registry

INTRODUCTION

Since many biological drug patents have expired, biosimilar agents (BIOs) have been developed; however, there are still some reservations in their use, especially in childhood. The aim of the current study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors BIOs as treatment for pediatric non-infectious uveitis (NIU).

METHODS

Data from pediatric patients with NIU treated with TNF inhibitors BIOs were drawn from the international AutoInflammatory Disease Alliance (AIDA) registries dedicated to uveitis and Behçet's disease. The effectiveness and safety of BIOs were assessed in terms of frequency of relapses, risk for developing ocular flares, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), glucocorticoids (GCs)-sparing effect, drug survival, frequency of ocular complications, and adverse drug event (AE).

RESULTS

Forty-seven patients (77 affected eyes) were enrolled. The BIOs employed were adalimumab (ADA) (89.4%), etanercept (ETA) (5.3%), and infliximab (IFX) (5.3%). The number of relapses 12 months prior to BIOs and at last follow-up was 282.14 and 52.43 per 100 patients/year. The relative risk of developing ocular flares before BIOs introduction compared to the period following the start of BIOs was 4.49 (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.38-5.98, p = 0.004). The number needed to treat (NNT) for ocular flares was 3.53. Median BCVA was maintained during the whole BIOs treatment (p = 0.92). A significant GCs-sparing effect was observed throughout the treatment period (p = 0.002). The estimated drug retention rate (DRR) at 12-, 24-, and 36-month follow-up were 92.7, 83.3, and 70.8%, respectively. The risk rate for developing structural ocular complications was 89.9/100 patients/year before starting BIOs and 12.7/100 patients/year during BIOs treatment, with a risk ratio of new ocular complications without BIOs of 7.1 (CI 3.4-14.9, p = 0.0003). Three minor AEs were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

TNF inhibitors BIOs are effective in reducing the number of ocular uveitis relapses, preserving visual acuity, allowing a significant GCs-sparing effect, and preventing structural ocular complications.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT05200715.

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.

Targeted therapies for uveitis in spondyloarthritis: A narrative review

Spondyloarthritis (SpA) encompasses a group of chronic inflammatory disorders of the joints frequently associated with uveitis in almost a quarter of cases. SpA-related uveitis typically affects the eye anterior chamber with sudden onset, causing pain, redness, photophobia, and blurred vision. Ophthalmologists will describe an acute anterior unilateral uveitis. Most patients present with episodic acute anterior non-granulomatous uveitis and retain excellent visual acuity. However, systemic treatments are recommended in the event of frequent relapses (2-3/year) or in rare cases of sight-threatening with ocular complications. The improved understanding of the pathogenesis of SpA has led to the management of this disease by biologics. Here, we review the main data regarding the opportunity to target specific components in inflammatory pathways for the treatment of SpA-related uveitis. These therapies are recommended for long-term control when uveitis relapses occur too frequently despite conventional systemic treatments. Significant benefits have been obtained with the tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors (TNFis), particularly infliximab and adalimumab. Paradoxically, a high number of uveitis occurrences have been shown on etanercept. Mixed results have been demonstrated with interleukin-17 antagonists (secukinumab) and interleukin-12/interleukin-23 antagonists (ustekinumab) in cases of failure of TNFis. JAK inhibitors seem to be a valuable class of medications for these patients in the future. Although SpA-related uveitis is typically managed with conventional local and/or systemic treatments, these biological/targeted therapies may provide avenues to control both the underlying SpA and uveitis manifestations. Thus, a close collaboration between patients, rheumatologists, internists, and ophthalmologists is needed to optimally manage ocular inflammation in SpA.

Efficacy and Safety of Switching from Adalimumab Originator to SB5, Adalimumab Biosimilar for Noninfectious Uveitis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of switching from adalimumab originator (Humira, AbbVie) to SB5, adalimumab biosimilar (Adalloce, Samsung Bioepis) in patients with noninfectious uveitis (NIU).

METHODS

Fifteen patients (29 eyes) with NIU who were switched from adalimumab originator to SB5 and followed up for 6 months or longer were retrospectively included. Data consisted of best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA, logMAR), intraocular pressure (IOP, mmHg), anterior chamber (AC) cell grade, anterior vitreous (AV) cell grade, vitreous haze grade, central macular thickness (CMT, μm), and macular volume (MV, mm3) at pre-switching, 2, 4, and 6 months post-switching.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in BCVA, AC and AV cell grades, and vitreous haze grades at 2, 4, and 6 months post- compared with pre-switching, and no significant differences in CMT and MV at 2 and 6 months post-switching. CMT and MV decreased from 260.55 ± 67.44 μm and 8.37 ± 1.14 mm3 at pre-switching to 244.14 ± 60.31 μm (p = 0.032) and 8.11 ± 1.20 mm3 (p = 0.027) at 4 months post-switching, respectively. There was no recurrence of uveitis, as defined by AC cell grade, vitreous haze, or BCVA. Four patients (27%) were switched back to adalimumab originator after a mean of 9 weeks, due to discomfort during the injection (three patients) and technical difficulty with the new injection device (one patient). No other adverse events occurred after switching to SB5.

CONCLUSION

Switching from adalimumab originator to SB5 for NIU does not result in clinically significant differences in treatment efficacy and safety.

Recent advances in uveitis therapy: focus on selected phase 2 and 3 clinical trials

INTRODUCTION

Uveitis is a heterogeneous group of ocular conditions characterized by inflammation of the uveal tract. It is a leading cause of blindness in developed countries and exerts significant psychological, social, and economic impact on both patients and the larger society. While there are numerous pharmacotherapy options, posterior segment noninfectious uveitis remains a significant challenge to treat due to its severity, chronicity, and high recurrence rates.

AREAS COVERED

The index review highlights the unmet needs of uveitis pharmacotherapy and its research and the shortcomings of existing ocular and systemic therapeutic options for noninfectious uveitis. The more promising novel ocular drug delivery methods and therapeutic targets/drugs are discussed, and evidence from the clinical trials is evaluated.

EXPERT OPINION

There has been incredible growth in the number of treatment options available to uveitis patients today, especially with the new generation of biologic drugs. Available evidence suggests that these newer options may be superior to conventional immunosuppressive therapies in terms of efficacy and side effect profiles. Further high-quality research and additional clinical trials will be needed to clarify their roles in the stepladder treatment approach of noninfectious uveitis.