A large multicentre, randomized, double-blind, cross-over study in healthy volunteers to compare pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and safety of a pegfilgrastim biosimilar with its US- and EU-reference biologics

Efficacy and safety of biosimilar Peg-filgrastim after autologous stem cell transplant in myeloma and lymphoma patients: a comparative study with biosimilar Filgrastim, Lenograstim, and originator Peg-filgrastim

Data about biosimilar Peg-filgrastim (bioPEG) in autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) are still scarce. The aim of this study has been to assess efficacy and safety of bioPEG among lymphoma and myeloma patients undergoing ASCT, comparing these data with historical controls receiving other G-CSFs. Furthermore, an economic evaluation has been included to estimate the savings by using bioPEG. This is a prospective cohort study comparing lymphoma and myeloma patients undergoing ASCT and receiving bioPEG (n = 73) with three historical consecutive cohorts collected retrospectively who received other G-CSFs (Lenograstim - Leno - n = 101, biosimilar Filgrastim - bioFIL n = 392, and originator Peg-filgrastim - oriPEG n = 60). We observed a significantly shorter time to neutrophils and platelet engraftment (p < 0.001) in patients treated with bioPEG and oriPEG. Moreover, patients who received bioPEG showed a shorter hospitalization time (p < 0.001) and a lower transfusion need (p < 0.001). We did not observe any significant difference in terms of transplant-related mortality, mucositis, and diarrhea among the four groups. No serious adverse events were associated with bioPEG. Similar data were obtained after running a stratified analysis for lymphomas and myeloma separately conducted by using a propensity score matching. The average total cost per patient of bioPEG was € 18218.9 compared to € 23707.8, € 20677.3 and € 19754.9 of Leno, oriPEG, and bioFIL, respectively. In conclusion, bioPEG seems to be as effective as the originator and more effective than short-acting G-CSFs in terms of post-transplant engraftment in myeloma and lymphoma patients undergoing ASCT. Moreover, bioPEG was cost-effective when compared with the other G-CSFs.

Achieving white blood cell equity: are the safety profiles of biosimilar and reference pegfilgrastims comparable?

Biosimilars can provide choices for patients and may provide cost savings; however, their uptake has been slow in the USA, in part due to limited knowledge. To provide additional confidence in US pegfilgrastim biosimilars, this narrative review compared the safety profiles of biosimilar pegfilgrastims, currently approved or filed for approval in the USA, with the EU- and US-approved reference pegfilgrastims. Headache and bone pain were common to biosimilars and reference products and occurred at a similar incidence. Clinical trial data on the safety profiles of biosimilar pegfilgrastims and reference products have demonstrated similarity and comparability, with no unexpected safety outcomes. Overall, the safety profiles of biosimilar pegfilgrastims and reference pegfilgrastims demonstrated a high degree of similarity and comparability.

Effectiveness of biosimilar pegfilgrastim in patients with multiple myeloma after high-dose melphalan and autologous stem cell transplantation

Multiple myeloma (MM) is the main indication for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). Novel supportive therapies (e.g., granulocyte colony-stimulating factor) have significantly improved post-ASCT-related mortality; however, data on biosimilar pegfilgrastim-bmez (BIO/PEG) in this setting is lacking. This prospective cohort study compared Italian patients with MM who received BIO/PEG post-ASCT with data collected retrospectively from historical control groups from the same center who received either filgrastim-sndz (BIO/G-CSF) or pegfilgrastim (PEG; originator). The primary endpoint was time to neutrophil engraftment (three consecutive days with an absolute neutrophil count ≥ 0.5 × 10⁹/L). Secondary endpoints included incidence and duration of febrile neutropenia (FN). Of the 231 patients included, 73 were treated with PEG, 102 with BIO/G-CSF, and 56 with BIO/PEG. Median age was 60 years and 57.1% were male. Neutrophil engraftment was reached after a median of 10 days in the BIO/PEG and PEG groups and 11 days in the BIO/G-CSF group. Among patients who achieved neutrophil engraftment earlier than this (i.e., day 9), 58% (29/50) were on PEG; of those who achieved it later (i.e., day 11), 80.8% (59/73) were on BIO/G-CSF. FN incidence was higher with BIO/G-CSF (61.4%) versus PEG (52.1%) or BIO/PEG (37.5%) (p = 0.02 among groups). Patients on BIO/PEG had less frequent grade 2-3 diarrhea (5.5%) compared with BIO/G-CSF (22.5%) or PEG (21.9%); grade 2-3 mucositis was most frequent in the BIO/G-CSF group. In conclusion, pegfilgrastim and its biosimilar displayed an advantageous efficacy and safety profile compared with biosimilar filgrastim in patients with MM post-ASCT.

A review of the totality of evidence supporting the development and approval of a pegfilgrastim biosimilar (LA-EP2006)

OBJECTIVE

The totality-of-evidence approach requires that similarity between a proposed biosimilar and a reference biologic is demonstrated across a range of analytical, preclinical, and clinical parameters to establish biosimilarity. We describe the totality of evidence for Sandoz biosimilar pegfilgrastim (LA-EP2006 [marketed as Ziextenzo]) that supported its regulatory approval in Europe and the United States.

METHODS

Analytical similarity to the reference biologic [marketed by Amgen as Neulasta] was first investigated with regard to physiochemical quality attributes such as primary structure, pegylation, higher-order structures, variants and impurities, molecular size variants, and formulation (protein content, pH, excipients, etc.). In vitro biological activity studies were performed to examine the primary mechanism of action of pegfilgrastim. Bioequivalence (clinical pharmacokinetics [PK] and pharmacodynamics [PD]) of Sandoz biosimilar pegfilgrastim to the reference biologic was studied in healthy volunteers; efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity were assessed during confirmatory clinical efficacy studies in patients undergoing treatment for breast cancer.

RESULTS

No meaningful or relevant differences were identified between Sandoz biosimilar pegfilgrastim and the reference biologic during analytical testing. Similar receptor binding and induction of cellular proliferation in vitro confirmed no functional differences between the biologics. Clinical studies in healthy adult participants demonstrated PK/PD biosimilarity and a similar safety profile between biosimilar and reference pegfilgrastim. Clinical studies in a sensitive patient population also demonstrated similar efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity between Sandoz biosimilar pegfilgrastim and the reference biologic.

CONCLUSIONS

The totality of evidence confirms that Sandoz biosimilar pegfilgrastim matches the reference biologic and will therefore provide equivalent efficacy and safety in all eligible indications.

Supportive therapies in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia and appropriate use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors: a Delphi consensus statement

PURPOSE

Data indicate that the use of prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) for chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia (FN) in routine practice is not consistent with guideline recommendations. The initiative "supportive care for febrile neutropenia prevention and appropriateness of G-CFS use" was undertaken to address the issue of inappropriate prescription of G-CSFs and to improve guideline adherence in the treatment of FN.

METHODS

In a two-round Delphi procedure, 36 medical oncologists reviewed clinically relevant recommendations on risk assessment, the appropriate use of G-CSFs, and the prevention of FN based on available literature and individual clinical expertise.

RESULTS

The consensus was reached on 16 out of 38 recommendations, which are backed by evidence from randomised clinical trials and routine clinical practice. The medical oncologists agreed that the severity of neutropenia depends on patients' characteristics and chemotherapy intensity, and therefore, the risk of severe neutropenia or FN should be assessed at each chemotherapy cycle so as to initiate prophylaxis with G-CSFs if required. The use of biosimilar G-CSFs, with similar efficacy and safety profiles to the originator biologic, has improved the availability and sustainability of cancer care. The timing of supportive therapy is crucial; for example, long-acting G-CSF should be administered 24-72 h after chemotherapy administration. Each biological agent has a recommended administration dose and duration, and it is important to follow these recommendations to avoid complications associated with under-prophylaxis.

CONCLUSION

It is hoped that these statements will help to increase adherence to guideline recommendations for appropriate G-CSF use and improve patient care.

Phase I/II study to assess the clinical pharmacology and safety of single ascending and multiple subcutaneous doses of PF-06881894 in women with non-distantly metastatic breast cancer

PURPOSE

To evaluate the pharmacodynamics (PD), pharmacokinetics (PK), and safety of single and multiple doses of PF-06881894 (pegfilgrastim-apgf; Nyvepria™), a biosimilar to reference pegfilgrastim (Neulasta®), in women with non-distantly metastatic breast cancer.

METHODS

In Phase I (Cycle 0) of this Phase I/II study, the PD response (absolute neutrophil count [ANC]; CD34 + count), PK profile, and safety of a single 3- or 6-mg subcutaneous dose of PF-06881894 were assessed in chemotherapy-naïve patients before definitive breast surgery. In Phase II (Cycles 1-4), the PD response (duration of severe neutropenia [DSN, Cycle 1], ANC [Cycles 1 and 4]) and PK profile (Cycles 1 and 4) of single and multiple 6-mg doses of PF-06881894 concomitant with chemotherapy and after definitive breast surgery were assessed.

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients (mean age 59 years) were enrolled (Cycle 0, n = 12; Cycles 1-4, n = 13). In Cycle 0, PD responses and PK values were lower with 3-mg versus 6-mg PF-06881894. In Cycles 1 and 4, mean DSN was 0.667 days after single or multiple 6-mg doses of PF-06881894, respectively. In Cycle 4 versus Cycle 1, PD responses were more robust; PK values (mean area under the curve, maximum concentration) were lower; and clearance values were higher. The safety profile of PF-06881894 was similar to that for reference pegfilgrastim.

CONCLUSION

PF-06881894 as a single 3- or 6-mg dose prior to definitive surgery, or multiple 6-mg/cycle doses postoperatively, with/without myelosuppressive chemotherapy, was consistent with the clinical pharmacology and safety profile of reference pegfilgrastim.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

October 2017. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02650193. EudraCT Number: 2015-002057-35.

Innovative Design and Analysis for PK/PD Biosimilar Bridging Studies with Multiple References

When there are multiple reference products, (e.g., EU-approved product and US-licensed product), a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) bridging study is often conducted in order to bridge the clinical data from the original region (e.g., Europe) to the new region (e.g., USA) in support of the biosimilar regulatory submission in the new region. The purpose is to avoid duplicated clinical trials for clinical similarity between a proposed biosimilar product and the reference product in the new region provided that there is no ethnic concern in the two regions. In this article, some innovative statistical designs for PK/PD biosimilar bridging studies are proposed. Statistical model and methods under the proposed statistical designs are studied. Power analysis for sample size requirement based on Schuirmann's two one-sided tests procedure is also derived and compared to pairwise testing using simulation.

Meta-analysis of Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Results of 3 Phase 1 Studies with Biosimilar Pegfilgrastim

A meta‐analysis using data from 3 phase 1 studies evaluated the pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of Sandoz biosimilar versus US‐ and EU‐reference pegfilgrastim. The studies included a single‐dose, double‐blind, 3‐arm, parallel‐group study (study 1); a single‐dose, double‐blind, 2‐way crossover study (study 2); and a single‐dose, double‐blind, 3‐way, 6‐sequence crossover study (study 3). Healthy male and female subjects were randomized to receive the proposed biosimilar (all studies), US‐reference biologic (studies 1 and 3), or EU‐reference biologic (studies 1, 2, and 3). For PK parameters (area under the serum concentration–time curve from time of dosing and extrapolated to infinity, area under the serum concentration–time curve from the time of dosing to the last measurable concentration, and maximum observed serum concentration) and PD parameters (absolute neutrophil count area under the effect curve from the time of dosing to the last measurable concentration and maximum measured absolute neutrophil count) geometric mean ratios and 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for treatment comparisons were calculated using the meta‐analysis approach with a fixed‐effects model. PK/PD biosimilarity was concluded if the 90%CIs were within the equivalence margins of 0.80 to 1.25. The 90%CIs for the geometric mean ratios for the PK/PD parameters were all within the equivalence margins. Safety and tolerability were similar between the proposed biosimilar and the US‐ and EU‐reference pegfilgrastim in healthy subjects. This meta‐analysis of 3 phase 1 studies supports PK/PD similarity of Sandoz biosimilar pegfilgrastim to US‐ and EU‐reference pegfilgrastim. No clinically meaningful differences in safety or tolerability were observed.

Single-Dose Pharmacokinetics, Pharmacodynamics and Immunogenicity, and Multiple-Dose Immunogenicity of INTP5 (Pegfilgrastim Biosimilar) Versus Reference Pegfilgrastim in Healthy Subjects

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: INTP5 has been developed as a pegfilgrastim biosimilar. Single-dose, crossover study compared the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics (PK/PD) of INTP5 (pegfilgrastim biosimilar) with reference pegfilgrastim (Neulasta^®, pegfilgrastim-ref) and a multiple-dose, parallel-group study compared the immunogenicity of INTP5 with pegfilgrastim-ref in healthy subjects as part of a complete clinical development plan.

METHODS

In the PK/PD study, subjects received a single subcutaneous 6 mg dose of INTP5 and pegfilgrastim-ref (N = 142) separated by a 6-week washout period. The primary endpoints were area under the serum concentration-time curve measured from time zero to infinity (AUC_0-∞) and maximum measured serum concentration (C_max) of pegfilgrastim and area under the absolute neutrophil count (ANC) versus time curve from time zero to t (AUEC_0-t) and maximum measured ANC (E_max) of baseline non-adjusted ANCs. In the immunogenicity study, subjects received two 6 mg doses of INTP5 (N = 100) or pegfilgrastim-ref (N = 100) separated by 21 days. The primary endpoints were incidence of anti-drug antibodies (ADAs) in the two treatment groups.

RESULTS

The primary PK endpoints [AUC_0-∞ (90% CI 108.59-123.11) and C_max (106.24-118.99)] and the primary PD endpoints [AUEC_0-t (99.07-102.32) and E_max (100.24-104.25)] met the acceptance criteria of 80-125%. The incidence of ADAs was 10.6% in the INTP5 arm and 9.0% in the pegfilgrastim-ref arm. The 90% CI for risk difference of the ADA incidence between INTP5 and pegfilgrastim-ref was 1.64% (- 5.40 to 8.68) and was within the 10% margin. No neutralizing antibodies were reported. Immunogenicity did not impact PK/PD parameters and subjects with aberrant PK/PD/safety did not show immunogenicity concerns. Incidence of adverse events (AEs) was similar with INTP5 and pegfilgrastim-ref in both studies. The most common AEs were musculoskeletal pain and headache.

CONCLUSION

INTP5 showed PK/PD equivalence with pegfilgrastim-ref following a single dose, no clinically meaningful difference in the immune response following multiple doses, and a comparable safety profile.

Efficacy and safety of two pegfilgrastim biosimilars: Tripegfilgrastim and pegteograstim

Our aim was to compare the efficacy and safety of two recently developed biosimilars of pegfilgrastim, a pegylated form of the recombinant human granulocyte‐colony stimulating factor (G‐CSF) analog filgrastim with those of the reference pegfilgrastim. We retrospectively analyzed data from patients diagnosed with diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma (DLBCL) who were treated with first‐line R‐CHOP chemotherapy and received pegylated G‐CSF for primary prophylaxis. The following pegylated G‐CSFs were analyzed in this study: reference pegfilgrastim (Neulasta^®) and two of its biosimilars (tripegfilgrastim; Dulastin^® and pegteograstim; Neulapeg^®). In total, 296 patients were enrolled. The number of patients with at least one episode of neutropenia during R‐CHOP chemotherapy was the lowest in the reference cohort (pegfilgrastim: 127 of 193 patients, 65.8%; tripegfilgrastim: 64 of 69 patients, 92.8%; pegteograstim: 28 of 34 patients, 82.4%, P < .001). The number of patients with at least one episode of febrile neutropenia was also lowest in the reference cohort (pegfilgrastim: 67 of 193 patients, 34.7%; tripegfilgrastim: 38 of 69 patients, 55.1%; pegteograstim: 16 of 34 patients, 47.1%, P = .009). There were no differences in the duration of neutropenia and febrile neutropenia or treatment outcomes (rate of complete response or relapse and survival). There were no reports of grade 3 or higher adverse events requiring discontinuation of prophylactic pegylated G‐CSF in any group. The safety of the pegfilgrastim biosimilars for prophylactic purposes was comparable to that of the reference pegfilgrastim; however, in terms of their efficacy, the incidence of neutropenia and febrile neutropenia tended to be higher than that when using pegfilgrastim. The clinical relevance of these results in the biosimilar cohorts should be explored.

A large multicentre, randomized, double-blind, cross-over study in healthy volunteers to compare pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and safety of a pegfilgrastim biosimilar with its US- and EU-reference biologics

Aims

Recombinant PEGylated human granulocyte colony‐stimulating factor (pegfilgrastim) is indicated for the reduction of chemotherapy‐induced neutropenia and prevention of febrile neutropenia. Biosimilar pegfilgrastim is expected to reduce the financial burden of this complication of chemotherapy. The aim of this study was to demonstrate biosimilarity between Sandoz biosimilar pegfilgrastim and its US‐ and EU‐approved reference biologics.

Methods

Phase I, randomized, double‐blind, single‐dose, 3‐period, 6‐sequence cross‐over, multicentre study to evaluate the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, safety and immunogenicity of Sandoz biosimilar pegfilgrastim with US‐ and EU‐references in healthy adults.

Results

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic similarity was demonstrated between the 3 biologics, as the 90% confidence interval for all primary pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic endpoint comparisons were contained within the predefined similarity margins of 0.80–1.25. Safety, immunogenicity and tolerability were also similar.

Conclusions

Sandoz biosimilar pegfilgrastim demonstrated pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic similarity to both US‐ and EU‐reference biologics. No meaningful differences in safety, local tolerability and immunogenicity were identified.