Evaluation of Infliximab and Anti-infliximab LISA-TRACKER Immunoassays for the Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of SB2 Infliximab Biosimilar

Therapeutic drug monitoring in inflammatory bowel diseases. Position statement of the Spanish Working Group on Crohn's Disease and Ulcerative Colitis

The treatment of inflammatory bowel disease has undergone a significant transformation following the introduction of biologic drugs. Thanks to these drugs, treatment goals have evolved from clinical response and remission to more ambitious objectives, such as endoscopic or radiologic remission. However, even though biologics are highly effective, a significant percentage of patients will not achieve an initial response or may lose it over time. We know that there is a direct relationship between the trough concentrations of the biologic and its therapeutic efficacy, with more demanding therapeutic goals requiring higher drug levels, and inadequate exposure being common. Therapeutic drug monitoring of biologic medications, along with pharmacokinetic models, provides us with the possibility of offering a personalized approach to treatment for patients with IBD. Over the past few years, relevant information has accumulated regarding its utility during or after induction, as well as in the maintenance of biologic treatment, in reactive or proactive strategies, and prior to withdrawal or treatment de-escalation. The aim of this document is to establish recommendations regarding the utility of therapeutic drug monitoring of biologics in patients with inflammatory bowel disease, in different clinical practice scenarios, and to identify areas where its utility is evident, promising, or controversial.

Real-world evidence of the use of the infliximab biosimilar SB2: data from the PERFUSE study

Objective

PERFUSE is a non-interventional study of 1233 adult patients (rheumatology, n = 496; IBD, n = 737) receiving routine infliximab (IFX) biosimilar SB2 therapy. The aim of this report was to investigate the 12-month persistence, effectiveness and safety outcomes of routine SB2 treatment in patients with chronic inflammatory rheumatic disease.

Methods

Patients with a diagnosis of RA, PsA or axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) were assigned to one of three study cohorts according to whether SB2 treatment initiated after September 2017 had been the first IFX treatment (IFX naïve) or followed transition from reference IFX (IFX ref) or another IFX biosimilar (IFX bs). Outcomes to month 12 (±2) included persistence (primary outcome), SB2 dose, disease status, immunogenicity and safety.

Results

At month 12, persistence on SB2 in IFX-naïve, IFX ref and IFX bs cohorts, respectively, [mean percentage (95% CI)] by indication was as follows: 59% (36.1, 76.2), 75% (57.5, 86.1) and 85% (69.6, 93.0) for RA (n = 98); 64% (34.3, 83.3), 87% (65.6, 95.7) and 83% (60.0, 93.1) for PsA (n = 62); and 56% (44.4, 66.5), 80% (70.8, 86.1) and 80% (72.5, 85.6) for axSpA (n = 336). Disease activity was comparable at baseline and month 12 within the IFX ref and bs subgroups of all cohorts by indication. No immunogenicity concerns or new safety signals were detected.

Conclusion

SB2 was safe and effective in IFX-naïve patients and in patients transitioned from prior IFX ref or bs.

Trial registration

clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03662919.

PERFUSE: a French non-interventional study of patients with inflammatory bowel disease receiving infliximab biosimilar SB2: a 12-month analysis

Background

Flixabi^TM (SB2) is a biosimilar of the reference infliximab (IFX), Remicade^®. Published evidence on long-term, real-world use of SB2 in patients either IFX naive or transitioned from prior IFX is scarce.

Objectives

We evaluated persistence, effectiveness, and safety of SB2 over 12 months in adults with IBD [Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC)], participating in PERFUSE.

Design

PERFUSE is a long-term, non-interventional, multicenter study of patients receiving SB2 at specialist sites across France.

Methods

SB2 treatment was initiated in September 2017, either as first IFX treatment (IFX naive), after transition from treatment with reference IFX (IFX ref) or another IFX biosimilar (IFX bs), or both IFX ref and IFX bs (IFX multiswitch). Outcomes up to Month 12 (±2) include persistence on SB2 (primary outcome measure), SB2 dose, disease status, immunogenicity, and safety.

Results

This final 12-month analysis of patients with IBD includes 569 with CD and 168 with UC. Persistence [95% confidence interval (CI)] at Month 12 was CD: 89% (77.2; 94.9), UC: 78.5% (58.2; 89.8) for IFX naive; CD: 94% (91.0; 96.1), UC: 92.8% (84.8; 96.7) for IFX ref; CD: 91.6% (86.0; 95.0), UC: 94.2% (83.1; 98.1) for IFX bs; and CD 100% (100; 100), UC 100% (100; 100) for IFX multiswitch. In the CD and UC cohorts, disease activity among IFX naive patients declined from baseline to Month 12; with any prior IFX, the proportions of patients in remission at baseline, Month 6, and Month 12 remained unchanged in the UC cohort, and were comparable or higher in the CD cohort. No immunogenicity or safety signals were detected.

Conclusions

Patients with IBD can be initiated on SB2 or transitioned from IFX ref and/or IFX bs to SB2, with no loss of disease control or safety concerns, with >75% of naive and >90% of transitioned patients continuing on SB2 treatment at 12 months.

Tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) blockage reduces acute inflammation and delayed wound healing in oral ulcer of rats

Oral traumatic ulcers (OTU) are common in dental routine, and the control of proinflammatory cytokines, such as the tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α), may interfere with OTU repair. Our aim was to evaluate the role of TNF-α in the healing process of OTU in rats. Wistar male rats were divided into six groups: a control-group (treated with 0.1 mL/kg of saline) and five groups treated with anti-TNF-α infliximab (INF) at 1, 3, 5, 7, and 10 mg/kg immediately before OTU production. The animals were weighed (day 0) and euthanized on days 1, 3, 7, 14 and 21 after ulceration. The ulcers were clinically measured, and the mucosa samples were histologically (scores 0-4), histochemically (collagen assay (pircrosirius)), histomorphometrically (cell counting), and immunohistochemically (TNF-α, α-smooth-muscle-actin (α-SMA), monocyte-chemoattractive-protein-1 (MCP-1), interleukin-8 (IL-8), and fibroblast-growth-factor (FGF)) analyzed. The Evans blue assay was used to measure the vascular permeability. ANOVA-1-2-way/Bonferroni, Kruskal-Wallis/Dunn, and correlation analyses were performed (GraphPad Prism 5.0, p < 0.05). High doses of INF reduced the OTU area (p = 0.043), body mass loss (p = 0.023), vascular permeability (p < 0.001), and reduced delayed histologic scores (p < 0.05), polymorphonuclear (p < 0.001) and mononuclear (p < 0.001) cells, blood vessel counting (p = 0.006), and total (p < 0.001), type-I (p = 0.018), and type-III (p < 0.001) collagen. INF treatment reduced TNF-α immunostaining and delayed MPC-1, FGF, and α-SMA expression, with little/none influence in IL-8 immunostaining. TNF-α blockage by INF reduced acute inflammation in OTU but delayed cell migration and wound healing.

Adalimumab and anti-adalimumab LISA-TRACKER immunoassays performance criteria for therapeutic drug monitoring of adalimumab-amgen biosimilar (ABP501)

BACKGROUND

ABP501 is a biosimilar to Reference Adalimumab (HUMIRA®) produced by AMGEN. Adalimumab (ADA) has a marketing authorization for Crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis and other inflammatory or autoimmune diseases. The aim of this study was to evaluate the LISA-TRACKER assays developed by Theradiag (France), for the monitoring of ABP501 and anti-ABP501 antibodies in human serum.

RESULTS

68 ABP501 clinical samples were measured with the LISA TRACKER Duo Adalimumab assay. LISA TRACKER has been validated as suitable for quantification of ABP501 in human serum samples. Accuracy of the LISA-TRACKER was measured using 3 human serum matrices spiked with known levels of biosimilar, 3 levels spanning the dynamic range. Percentages of recovery were ranged from 90 to 120% for biosimilar batch1, and between 93 and 105% for biosimilar batch2. The acceptance criteria (CV < 20%) were met for intra-run (from 3.8 to 16.5%) and inter-run imprecision (from 4.4 to 13.9%) including the two batches. All results were comprised within ± 20% from results, obtained with the kit and sample unexposed in order to evaluate stability of the sample, stability of the kit and consistency of the results. In any case, but two, all percentages of inhibition were > 50% for specificity. Specificity was tested with Biosimilar spiked samples, Biosimilar with Humira® spiked samples, and clinical samples from patients treated with adalimumab biosimilar. All of these samples were spiked with polyclonal antibodies directed against Humira®. Specificity inhibition and specificity detection steps were also part of the validation parameters. Reagents made with ABP501 gave similar results than reagents made with Humira® meeting acceptance criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

LISA-TRACKER ADA and anti-ADA assays are reliable for the monitoring of patients treated with ABP501.

A Comprehensive Literature Review and Expert Consensus Statement on Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Biologics in Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of biologics is a rapidly evolving field. We aimed to provide a consensus statement regarding the clinical utility of TDM for biologics in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). A modified Delphi method was applied to develop consensus statements. A comprehensive literature review was performed regarding TDM of biologic therapies in IBD, and 45 statements were subsequently formulated on the potential application of TDM in IBD. The statements, along with literature, were then presented to a panel of 10 gastroenterologists with expertise in IBD and TDM who anonymously rated them on a scale of 1-10 (1 = strongly disagree and 10 = strongly agree). An expert consensus development meeting was held virtually to review, discuss, refine, and reformulate statements that did not meet criteria for agreement or that were ambiguous. During the meeting, additional statements were proposed. Panelists then confidentially revoted, and statements rated ≥7 by 80% or more of the participants were accepted. During the virtual meeting, 8 statements were reworded, 7 new statements were proposed, and 19 statements were rerated. Consensus was finally reached in 48/49 statements. The panel agreed that reactive TDM should be used for all biologics for both primary nonresponse and secondary loss of response. It was recommended that treatment discontinuation should not be considered for infliximab or adalimumab until a drug concentration of at least 10-15 μg/mL was achieved. Consensus was also achieved regarding the utility of proactive TDM for anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy. It was recommended to perform proactive TDM after induction and at least once during maintenance. Consensus was achieved in most cases regarding the utility of TDM of biologics in IBD, specifically for reactive and proactive TDM of anti-tumor necrosis factors.

A Systematic Review on Infliximab Biosimilar SB2: From Pre-Clinical Data to Real-World Evidence

INTRODUCTION

The infliximab biosimilar SB2 was approved in the EU (2016, Flixabi®) and the US (2017, Renflexis®) for the same indications as the reference product (Remicade®) based on a robust analytical and clinical data package.

AREAS COVERED

This systematic literature review summarizes available analytical and clinical data on SB2, including randomized controlled clinical trials and real-world evidence studies. Overall, 184 articles and congress abstracts were identified (excluding duplicates), whereof 5 reports on analytical data, four reports on two randomized controlled trials and 13 reports of real-world evidence studies were included.

EXPERT OPINION

The available analytical and clinical data support the equivalence of SB2 to the reference product across approved indications. This is further supported by emerging real-world evidence, particularly in extrapolated indications such as inflammatory bowel disease for both infliximab-naïve patients and patients already established on infliximab switching to SB2. Switching from originator or biosimilar infliximab to SB2 including both single and multiple switches was not associated with an increased risk of loss of treatment response or any safety or immunogenicity concerns. Overall, the approved infliximab biosimilar SB2 is safe and effective in clinical practice across licensed indications.

An in vitro comparison of four different immunoassays for the monitoring of Infliximab biosimilars drug levels

BACKGROUND

SB2 (Renflexis®, Merck) and CT-P13 (Inflectra®, Pfizer) are biosimilars of the reference Infliximab (Remicade®, Janssen) and are approved in Canada for use in indications for which Infliximab is approved, including inflammatory bowel disease. These biosimilars are structurally different but exhibit comparable physicochemical characteristics, pharmaceutical effectiveness and immunogenicity compared to Infliximab. Optimal Infliximab therapy currently relies on therapeutic drug monitoring offered by several reference laboratories.

OBJECTIVE

Because the appropriate dosing depends on accurate determination of drug levels and anti-drug antibodies, the ability of current Infliximab assays to measure the biosimilars and corresponding antibodies needs to be demonstrated.

METHODS

The correlation between Infliximab and the biosimilars measured with four different enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays for Infliximab detection was evaluated. Spiked serum samples were assayed with kits from (A) Immunodiagnostik/ALPCO Diagnostics, (B) R-Biopharm, (C) Theradiag and (D) Progenika Biopharma. The impact of various concentrations of antibodies to Infliximab on the quantification of biosimilars was also tested.

RESULTS

A good correlation of SB2, CT-P13 and reference Infliximab spiked serum samples was observed with the four assays. The observed bias between the original drug and biosimilars is clinically insignificant and less than the usual analytical variability observed with these methods. The quantification of the biosimilars and Infliximab was equally impacted in serums containing antibodies to Infliximab. The recovery of the drugs was inversely correlated with the concentration of anti-Infliximab antibodies, suggesting common immunodominant epitopes for SB2, CT-P13 and Infliximab.

CONCLUSION

The ability of these assays to properly quantify the biosimilars Renflexis® and Inflectra® has been demonstrated. The therapeutic drug monitoring required for Infliximab therapy can be adequately performed with the biosimilars using the kits currently in use or available in clinical laboratories.

SB5 shows cross-immunogenicity to adalimumab but not infliximab: results in patients with inflammatory bowel disease or rheumatoid arthritis

BACKGROUND

The primary objective of this study was to analyze the cross-reactivity of antidrug antibodies to reference adalimumab (ADL) and SB5 (adalimumab biosimilar) in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) or rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

Sera from patients with IBD and RA with or without antibodies to adalimumab (ATA+ or ATA-, respectively) were tested for cross-reactivity with SB5 and ADL. Functional inhibition of tumor necrosis factor-α binding was measured. Sera from patients with antibodies to reference infliximab (ATI+) were examined for cross-reactivity to SB5. Sera were tested by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay.

RESULTS

All 30 anti-ADL ATA+ sera from patients with IBD and all 4 anti-SB5 ATA+ sera from patients with RA were cross-reactive with ADL and SB5 (range of mean concentrations: IBD, 20.99-21.31 μg/ml; RA, 16.46-17.48 μg/ml). In general, there was no significant difference between mean ATA titers. A strong correlation was detected in all ATA+ samples (rho = 0.997 to >0.999; p < 0.001 each). However, ATA- sera were not reactive to either ADL or SB5. anti-ADL ATA+ sera similarly neutralized functional activity of ADL and SB5; no functional inhibition was observed with ATA- sera. ATI+ sera did not cross-react with SB5.

CONCLUSIONS

ADL and SB5 show cross-immunogenicity in sera from patients with IBD or RA, supporting shared immune-dominant epitopes. ATI+ sera did not cross-react with SB5, suggesting different immunogenic epitopes between infliximab and SB5.

Appropriate Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Biologic Agents for Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Diseases

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is widely available for biologic therapies in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). We reviewed current data and provided expert opinion regarding the clinical utility of TDM for biologic therapies in IBD.

METHODS

We used a modified Delphi method to establish consensus. A comprehensive literature review was performed regarding the use of TDM of biologic therapy in IBD and presented to international IBD specialists. Subsequently, 28 statements on the application of TDM in clinical practice were rated on a scale of 1 to 10 (1 = strongly disagree and 10 = strongly agree) by each of the panellists. Statements were accepted if 80% or more of the participants agreed with a score ≥7. The remaining statements were discussed and revised based on the available evidence followed by a second round of voting.

RESULTS

The panel agreed on 24 (86%) statements. For anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapies, proactive TDM was found to be appropriate after induction and at least once during maintenance therapy, but this was not the case for the other biologics. Reactive TDM was appropriate for all agents both for primary non-response and secondary loss of response. The panellists also agreed on several statements regarding TDM and appropriate drug and anti-drug antibody (ADA) concentration thresholds for biologics in specific clinical scenarios.

CONCLUSION

Consensus was achieved towards the utility of TDM of biologics in IBD, particularly anti-TNF therapies. More data are needed especially on non-anti-TNF biologics to further define optimal drug concentration and ADA thresholds as these can vary depending on the therapeutic outcomes assessed.