Efficacy and safety of CT-P13, a biosimilar of infliximab, in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: A retrospective multicenter study

Systematic review: effectiveness and safety of switching between originator infliximab and biosimilar infliximab in patients with inflammatory bowel disease

INTRODUCTION

Infliximab (IFX) biosimilars are available to treat inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), offering cost reductions versus originator IFX in some jurisdictions. However, concerns remain regarding the efficacy and safety of originator-to-biosimilar switching. This systematic literature review evaluated safety and effectiveness of switching between IFX products in patients with IBD, including multiple switchers.

METHODS

Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched to capture studies (2012-2022) including patients with IBD who switched between approved IFX products. Effectiveness outcomes: disease activity; disease severity; response to treatment; patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Safety outcomes: incidence and rate of adverse events (AEs); discontinuations due to AEs, failure rate; hospitalizations; surgeries. Immunogenicity outcomes (n, %): anti-drug antibodies; patients receiving concomitant immunomodulatory medication.

RESULTS

Data from 85 publications (81 observational, two randomized controlled trials) were included. Clinical effectiveness outcomes were consistent with the known profile of originator IFX with no difference after switching. There were no unexpected/serious AEs after switching, and rates of AEs were generally consistent with the known profile of IFX.

CONCLUSIONS

Most studies reported that clinical, PROs, and safety outcomes for originator-to-biosimilar switching were clinically equivalent to originator responses. Limited data are available regarding multiple switches.

PROTOCOL REGISTRATION

www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero identifier is CRD42021289144.

Efficacy and safety of biosimilar infliximab in bio-naïve patients with Crohn's disease

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

The infliximab biosimilar CT-P13 was the first biosimilar drug targeting tumor necrosis factor-α. However, its efficacy and safety in real-world clinical situations have remained insufficient. Therefore, we aimed to verify the efficacy and safety of CT-P13 in bio-naïve patients with Crohn's disease.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This retrospective multicenter study compared the remission rate at week 54 between patients with Crohn's disease who were treated with originator infliximab or CT-P13. Endoscopic and laboratory findings were assessed in both groups. A total of 184 (156 originator and 28 CT-P13) patients were analyzed. Of these, 138 originator users and 19 biosimilar users completed 54-week administration.

RESULTS

The clinical remission rates in patients taking originator infliximab of CT-P13 at week 54 were 92.5 % and 100 %, respectively. The endoscopic scores of each group significantly decreased from baseline at week 54 in both groups, and the mucosal healing rate at week 54 was 53 % and 64 %, respectively. Laboratory data including C-reactive protein, serum albumin, and hemoglobin significantly improved from baseline to week 14 and 54 in both groups. Adverse events were observed more frequently in the CT-P13 group (25 % vs. 4.5 %, p = 0.0015), but severe adverse events were rare in both groups.

CONCLUSION

The efficacy and safety of CT-P13 were comparable with those of originator infliximab in bio-naïve patients with Crohn's disease evaluated by clinical, endoscopic, and laboratory findings. This study establishes the needed groundwork for the development of a strategy for treatment with biologics in patients with Crohn's disease.

Long-term effectiveness and safety of infliximab-biosimilar: A multicenter Phoenix retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Infliximab (IFX) effectively treats patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). IFX-biosimilar (IFX-BS) has the same amino acid sequence as that of the IFX originator, and its increasing use is expected to reduce national healthcare costs. Long-term efficacy and safety of IFX-BS in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) have not been completely investigated.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective, multicenter observational study of patients with IBD who received IFX-BS treatment at three hospitals between October 2016 and April 2022. Clinical data were collected from electronic medical records and evaluated for achieving clinical remission (CR) using Crohn's disease activity index (CDAI) and partial Mayo (pMayo) score, persistency of long-term IFX-BS administration, and clinical response rate in the bio-naïve and bio-failure groups.

RESULTS

A total of 117 patients with IBD (90 CD and 27 UC) were included. The study findings indicated that both bio-naïve and bio-failure groups of patients with UC showed similar effectiveness of IFX-BS. The treatment persistence rate in patients with CD was significantly higher in the bio-naïve (P = 0.042) and switch (P = 0.010) groups than in the bio-failure group. In the former two groups, the treatment persistence rate was high at two years after administration (more than 80%). In patients with UC, the findings indicated higher treatment persistence rate in the switch group than in the bio-naïve group. Univariable and multivariable analyses for treatment persistence rate showed that the albumin level at the initial IFX-BS administration and groups (bio-naïve, bio-failure and switch) were effective factors for patients with CD. Adverse events were reported in 18 patients (15.4%).

CONCLUSION

The present study demonstrates the long-term effectiveness and safety of IFX-BS. In addition to the favorable remission induction in the bio-naïve and bio-failure groups, we demonstrated remission maintenance and treatment persistence rates beyond two years. Albumin level and groups were associated with better treatment persistence in patients with CD.

Efficacy and safety of biosimilar versus originator infliximab in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: A real-world cohort analysis

BACKGROUND

Anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) monoclonal antibody, infliximab, is the primary therapeutic modality for patients with Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC), refractory to conventional therapy. Biosimilars of infliximab have been shown to have equivalent efficacy to originator infliximab. We compared the safety and efficacy of infliximab biosimilar with the originator in Indian patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

METHODS

Patients with IBD treated with either originator or biosimilar infliximab from January 2005 to October 2020 were included in this retrospective analysis. The safety and efficacy of originator or biosimilar infliximab in inducing and maintaining clinical remission at weeks 14 and 52 for CD and UC were evaluated. Disease activity was estimated at baseline, after induction therapy, after 1 year of treatment, and during 12 months of follow-up.

RESULTS

In all, 137 patients (82 CD; 55 UC) were included, of whom 102 were on originator, and 35 patients received biosimilar. In biosimilar group, clinical response and remission rates at weeks 14 and 52 were 84.2%, 58% and 68.4%, 52.6% in CD and 81.2%, 56.2% and 68.7%, 62.5% in UC patients, respectively. Among patients who were on originator, clinical response and remission rates at weeks 14 and 52 were 79.4%, 46% and 57.1%, 43% in CD and 72%, 64.1% and 66.7%, 56.4% in UC patients, respectively. Thirty-three (24.1%) patients experienced adverse events; eighteen developed tuberculosis (TB), of whom 17 received originator and one patient received biosimilar.

CONCLUSIONS

Infliximab biosimilar is comparable to originator infliximab in terms of safety profile and its efficacy in inducing and maintaining remission in patients with IBD.

Discontinuation and Switchback After Non-Medical Switching from Originator Tumor Necrosis Factor Alpha (TNF) Inhibitors to Biosimilars: A Meta-Analysis of Real-World Studies from 2012 to 2018

INTRODUCTION

To examine the prevalence rates of biosimilar discontinuation and switchback to the originator tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF) inhibitors following non-medical switch (NMS) in patients.

METHODS

Real-world studies reporting biosimilar discontinuation and switchback rates following NMS published between January 2012 and August 2018 were identified through a systematic literature review. A meta-analysis estimated the annualized discontinuation and switchback rates. A subsequent meta-analysis assessed annualized incremental discontinuation rate among studies reporting both discontinuation rates in patients who underwent an NMS (switchers) and patients who remained on originators (non-switchers).

RESULTS

A total of 66 publications were identified: 31 in gastroenterology, 32 in rheumatology, and 3 in both. Half of the studies reported switchback rates; only 9 studies reported discontinuation rates for both switchers and non-switchers. Across studies, the mean/range sample size of the NMS patient population was 136/9-1641; mean/range follow-up was 10/3-24 months. Annualized biosimilar discontinuation rate was 21% (95% confidence interval [CI] 18%, 25%). Switchback rate was 14% (95% CI 10%, 17%) among all NMS patients and 62% (95% CI 44%, 80%) among discontinuers. The mean/range sample size of switchers and non-switchers was 344/89-1621 and 768/19-2870, respectively; mean/range follow-up was 11/6-18 and 12/6-8 months, respectively. Annualized incremental biosimilar discontinuation rate was 18% (95% CI 4%, 31%).

CONCLUSION

Biosimilar discontinuation was found to be prevalent among patients who underwent an NMS from an originator TNF inhibitor to its biosimilar(s) in the real world. In addition, switchback to the originator TNF inhibitors was common following biosimilar discontinuation. Careful consideration is necessary when switching patients already on an originator TNF inhibitor to its biosimilar(s). Main limitations included the heterogeneity of the studies and the limited comparability of the data.

Exploring the Reasons Behind the Substantial Discontinuation Rate Among Patients Taking CT-P13 in a Large Tertiary Hospital in Western Switzerland: A Retrospective Cohort Study Using Routinely Collected Medical Data

BACKGROUND

CT-P13 is an infliximab biosimilar that was granted market authorization in Switzerland in 2016. Despite the growing literature supporting the equivalence of CT-P13 compared with originator infliximab regarding the efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity and the undeniable cost-saving opportunities, CT-P13 remains widely underused in Switzerland.

OBJECTIVE

Leaving aside the phenomenon of a low initiation rate, this study aimed to explore the reasons behind the high discontinuation rate observed among the patients taking CT-P13 in a large tertiary hospital in Western Switzerland.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study using routinely collected data. Patients were eligible if they received originator infliximab or CT-P13 between September 2017 and December 2020. They were included if they had received at least two CT-P13 infusions during the same period. Patients were excluded if the follow-up was incomplete prior to or 6 months after their first CT-P13 infusion and if they had an oncological main diagnosis. Primary outcomes were the reasons for treatment discontinuation.

RESULTS

One hundred and fifty-six patients were included and classified into two groups: switchers who were treated with originator infliximab and were switched to CT-P13 (n = 85, 54%) and initiators who did not receive originator infliximab prior to CT-P13 treatment (n = 71, 46%). Included patients belonged to three different groups of diagnosis: gastroenterological (67, 43%), rheumatological (61, 39%), and immunological (28, 18%). Twenty-three (27%) switchers and 35 (49%) initiators discontinued CT-P13 after 12 months. Main reasons for CT-P13 discontinuation were lack of efficacy (n = 21, 36%) and secondary loss of response (n = 16, 28%); however, objective assessments were not available. Initiators' probability to discontinue CT-P13 at 12 months was significantly higher than switchers' (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Lack of efficacy and secondary loss of response were the main reasons for the high CT-P13 discontinuation rate observed in a large tertiary hospital in Western Switzerland. Lack of active training and coordination among healthcare professionals and little education in patients may have exacerbated patients' subjective complaints and increased the CT-P13 discontinuation rate.

The impact of tumor burden at the initial hepatectomy on the recurrence-to-death survival after repeat surgical resection/radiofrequency ablation: a retrospective study

Background

Previous studies have reported the surgical resection (SR) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) could achieve comparable recurrence-to-death survival (RTDS). However, the impact of primary tumor burden on RTDS of patients with recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) following SR or RFA has not been clarified.

Methods

From January 2009 to March 2015, 171 patients who underwent initial hepatectomy and second curative treatments in West China Hospital were retrospectively analyzed. Survival analysis was performed by the Kaplan–Meier method. Risk factors were identified using the Cox proportional hazard model.

Results

At initial hepatectomy, 96 patients (56.1%) were diagnosed with HCC within the Milan criteria (MC), and 75 patients (43.9%) were HCC beyond the MC. The clinicopathological features and re-treatment methods of recurrent HCC were similar between patients with primary HCC within or beyond the MC. Patients with primary HCC within the MC had longer recurrence time (31.4 ± 24.2 months vs. 20.2 ± 16 months, P < 0.001). The 1- and 3- year RTDS within and beyond the MC group were 88.8%, 57.6% and 79.0%, 46.3%, respectively (P = 0.093). In multivariate analysis, the recurrence time, tumor size and AFP > 400 ng/mL at the time of recurrence were associated with RTDS.

Conclusions

The primary tumor burden had no impact on RTDS, but had an impact on recurrence time. The recurrence time had an impact on RTDS and might be a good index to reflect the biology of recurrent HCC.

Impact of Infliximab-dyyb (Infliximab Biosimilar) on Clinical and Patient-Reported Outcomes: 1-Year Follow-up Results from an Observational Real-World Study Among Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease in the US and Canada (the ONWARD Study)

Introduction

To date, there are limited real-world studies published on the use of infliximab-dyyb, a biosimilar to reference product (RP) infliximab approved for the treatment of moderate to severe inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), including Crohn’s disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) in North America. This study examined utilization patterns and the effects of infliximab-dyyb on clinical outcomes, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and healthcare resource use (HCRU) in IBD patients in a real-world setting.

Methods

In this prospective, observational study, adult IBD patients in the US and Canada were recruited to initiate treatment with infliximab-dyyb and followed for 12 months. Patients included biologic-naïve users of infliximab-dyyb and patients switching from RP infliximab or other biologics to infliximab-dyyb. Partial Mayo (pMAYO) and Harvey Bradshaw Index (HBI) scores measured clinical outcomes for the UC and CD cohorts, respectively. Key PRO measures included the SIBDQ, EQ-VAS, and psychological outcomes. In addition, work productivity, HCRU, and adverse events (AEs) were assessed.

Results

A total of 67 CD and 48 UC patients were enrolled (51% female; mean age 44 years; 87% Caucasian; mean BMI 27.9). Thirty-nine patients were biologic-naïve, 57 switched from RP infliximab, and 19 switched from other biologics. Among UC biologic-naïve users, pMAYO decreased from 5.67 to 1.09 (p < 0.0001) and the remission rate increased from 5.6 to 90.9% (p = 0.0015). For UC patients switching from RP infliximab, pMAYO decreased from 1.38 to 0.29 (p = 0.0103). For CD biologic-naïve users, HBI scores and remission rates did not significantly change. The scores on all the PROs significantly improved from baseline to 12 months. A total of 22 AEs occurred consistent with the known AE profile for infliximab.

Conclusions

Clinical outcomes among biologic-naïve users of infliximab-dyyb improved for UC and were maintained for CD patients. Biologic-naïve users of infliximab-dyyb showed significant improvements in PROs. Patients switching from RP infliximab to infliximab-dyyb maintained their clinical outcomes and PROs.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Registration Number: NCT03801928 (February 23, 2018).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12325-022-02104-6.

Comparison of performances of infliximab biosimilars CT-P13 versus SB2 in the treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases: a real-life multicenter, observational study in Italy

BACKGROUND

To compare the performances of Infliximab (IFX) biosimilar CT-P13 and SB2 in the treatment of Inflammatory Bowel Diseases (IBD) outpatients in Italy.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Three hundred and eighty IBD outpatients were retrospectively evaluated. The primary endpoint was to compare the two IFX biosimilars in terms of reaching and maintenance of remission at any timepoint.

RESULTS

197 patients with Ulcerative Colitis (UC) and 183 patients with Crohn's Disease (CD) treated with CT-P13 or SB2 and having a median (IQR) follow-up of 12 (6-36) months were compared: 230 (60.5%) were naïve to anti-TNFα, 20 (5.26%) were switched from IFX originator or from IFX CT-P13 to IFX SB2. Clinical remission was achieved in 133 (67.5%) UC patients and in 164 (89.6%) CD patients (p < 0.000), with no differences between CT-P13 and SB2 in the rate of remission in UC (p = 0.667) and CD (p = 0.286). Clinical response, steroid-free remission, rate of surgery, mucosal healing (MH) in UC, switching from IFX originator or from other biosimilar, and safety were similar. Higher MH rate was obtained in CD patients treated with CT-P13 (p = 0.004).

CONCLUSION

This first comparative study found that both IFX biosimilars CT-P13 and SB2 are effective and safe in managing IBD outpatients.

Real-world data on the infliximab biosimilar CT-P13 (Remsima®) in inflammatory bowel disease

BACKGROUND

In recent years, biological therapies have revolutionized the management of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD); however, they are expensive. The development of biosimilar products has allowed us to reduce healthcare costs and improve patients’ access to these treatments. Although various studies support the similarity between infliximab and its biosimilar CT-P13 in terms of efficacy and safety, there are unmet needs regarding research on these agents in the context of IBD.

AIM

To analyze clinical response rates to CT-P13 and adverse events in IBD patients treated in real-life practice.

METHODS

An observational, prospective, multicenter study of IBD patients treated with CT-P13 in clinical practice who were naïve to biological treatments or failed to respond to other anti-tumor necrosis factor drugs or had switched from infliximab originator was carried out. No diagnostic or follow-up interventions were conducted on patients outside usual clinical practice. The primary endpoints were clinical response rates and number of adverse events. The primary efficacy variable was the proportion of patients who were in clinical remission and/or had a clinical response at 3, 6, 9, and 12 mo.

RESULTS

A total of 220 IBD patients treated with CT-P13 (Remsima^®) were included in the study: 87 (40%) with ulcerative colitis and 133 (60%) with Crohn’s disease. Mean age of the patients was 41.47 (SD 15.74) years, and 58% were female. Nineteen (9%) patients started treatment with CT-P13 after switching from infliximab. Of the remaining 201 patients, 142 (65%) were naïve to biologic agents. At baseline, 68.6% (n = 138/201) of patients presented with active disease. After 12 mo of treatment, 14.8% (n = 12/81) presented with active disease, and 64.2% (n = 52/81) were in clinical remission without corticosteroids. After 3 mo, 75.5% (n = 115/152) had a clinical response or achieved clinical remission, which was sustained for 12 mo (85.2%; n = 69/81). There was a decrease in specific IBD indices at 3, 6, 9, and 12 mo (P < 0.001). A total of 34 adverse events were reported by 27 (12.3%) patients, 9 (26.5%) of which were serious.

CONCLUSION

CT-P13 is an effective and safe infliximab biosimilar for the treatment of IBD in real-life practice and may be a valid and attractive alternative for the treatment of IBD.

Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of pharmacists toward biosimilar medicines in Nigeria

BACKGROUND

Biopharmaceutical medicines have transformed the treatment of various long-term diseases, despite their high cost and limited availability. Due to their cost saving potentials, biosimilar medicines represent a new wave of therapy for several diseases in the next few years. Thus, pharmacists are uniquely placed to promote and enhance their uptake.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this study were to assess Nigerian pharmacists' biosimilar medicine knowledge, attitudes, and practices.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional, national online survey of conveniently sampled pharmacists in Nigeria. Data were collected with a validated 31-item biosimilar medicine knowledge, attitude, and practice questionnaire. The Pearson correlation (r) analysis was conducted to investigate the association among knowledge, attitude, and practice. A P value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Of the 600 pharmacists who were invited to participate in the survey, 411 completed the questionnaire giving a response rate of 68.5%. The mean knowledge score was 6.2 ± 3.0 out of a maximum score of 14. Most of the participants (n = 268, 65.2%) had overall knowledge scores of 1 to 7. The mean attitude score was 35.0 ± 8.8 out of a maximum score of 55, whereas that of practice was 18.7 ± 5.3 out of a maximum score of 30. Knowledge was significantly positively correlated with practice (r = 0.360).

CONCLUSION

Most of the surveyed pharmacists had poor knowledge of biosimilar medicines, while their reported fair attitude did not translate to good practice.

Viability of a Serum Infliximab Concentration-Detecting Reagent as a Qualitative Assay for an Infliximab Biosimilar

The efficacy of infliximab in treating rheumatoid arthritis depends on its serum trough concentration, which must be maintained at a minimum of 1 µg/mL to achieve the desired effects. However, Japan's National Health Insurance system does not cover tests for rheumatoid arthritis patients undergoing treatment with biosimilar infliximab because its performance as a biosimilar remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate whether the Remi-check Q qualitative assay yields comparable results for biosimilar infliximab and the originator product. Infliximab BS 100 "NK" and Remicade 100^® were separately diluted in pooled human serum to yield test samples at the following concentrations: 0.30, 0.70, 1.20, and 3.00 µg/mL. Prepared samples were quantitatively assessed using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and qualitatively using Remi-check Q, and the results obtained for the originator and biosimilar product were compared. For both originator and biosimilar infliximab, Remi-check Q yielded a negative result for all 0.30 and 0.70 µg/mL samples and a positive result for all 3.00 µg/mL samples. However, negative results were obtained with a fraction of the 1.20 µg/mL samples (biosimilar, 4/15; originator, 3/15). Concurrence rates between the results of quantitative ELISA and qualitative Remi-check Q analyses were comparable between originator and biosimilar infliximab at all tested concentrations. These results indicate that Remi-check Q yields comparable results for biosimilar infliximab and the originator product on being used as a qualitative assay for trough serum levels.

The mode of delivery and content of communication strategies used in mandatory and non-mandatory biosimilar transitions: a systematic review with meta-analysis

Effective patient-provider communication is crucial to promote shared decision-making. However, it is unclear how to explain treatment changes to ensure patient acceptance, such as when transitioning from a bio-originator to a biosimilar. This review investigates communication strategies used to educate patients on transitioning to biosimilars and explores whether the willingness to transition and treatment persistence differs for the delivery (verbal or written) and the amount of information provided. MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and relevant conference databases were systematically searched. Communication strategies from 33 studies (88% observational cohort studies) published from 2012 to 2020 were synthesized and willingness to transition, persistence, and subjective adverse events explored. Patients only received information verbally in 11 studies. The remaining 22 studies also provided written information. Cost-saving was the main reason provided for the transition. Patients were most willing to transition when receiving written and verbal information (χ² = 5.83, p = .02) or written information that only addressed a few (3-5) concerns (χ² = 16.08, p < .001). There was no significant difference for persistence or subjective adverse events (p's > .05). Few randomized controlled trials have been conducted. Available data shows more willingness to transition when patients received written and verbal information. Initial documents should contain basic information and consultations or telephone calls used to address concerns.

Biosimilar Interchangeability and Emerging Treatment Strategies for Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: A Commentary

This commentary summarizes a collection of key references published within the last ten years, and identifies pharmacologic research directions to improve treatment access and success through greater biosimilar or “follow-on” biologic utilization combined with other targeted small molecule agents that possess unique pathophysiologic mechanisms for inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) in adult and pediatric patients. Since they are not identical to the originator or reference biologic agent, all biosimilars are not generically equivalent. However, in the US and other countries, they are considered therapeutically interchangeable if the manufacturer has demonstrated no clinically meaningful differences from the reference product. Comparisons of different clinical initiation and switching scenarios are discussed with reference to interchangeability, immunogenicity, nocebo effect, cost effectiveness, and time courses for discontinuation rates.

Comparison of original and biosimilar infliximab (CTP-13) in biologic-naïve patients with Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis: a retrospective, multicenter real-life study in Spain

PURPOSE

biosimilar infliximab (CTP-13) has been recently approved for the treatment of several immune-mediated inflammatory disorders, including inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Comparative studies between this biosimilar and original infliximab in the real clinical practice are scarce. The objective of this study was to compare short and long-term safety and efficacy of original (O) and biosimilar infliximab (B-IFX) in biologic-naïve, IBD patients in the real life clinical practice.

METHODS

a retrospective, multicentric study was performed in five Spanish hospitals. Consecutive IBD, biologic-naïve patients from an historic cohort who initiated O-IFX from January 2013 were compared with biologic-naïve patients, who started treatment with B-IFX since its approval in January 2015. The evaluation of efficacy was assessed after the induction phase, at week 14 and week 54 of treatment. Time to dose escalation or treatment persistence of both O-IFX and B-IFX was also considered. The appearance of serious adverse events was recorded.

RESULTS

two hundred and thirty-nine IBD biologic-naïve patients who started with O-IFX or B-IFX were included: 153 patients were diagnosed with Crohn's disease (95 treated with O- and 58 treated with B-IFX) and 86 with ulcerative colitis (40 received O- and 46 received B-IFX). At weeks 14 and 54, both O-IFX and B-IFX groups reached a similar clinical response and remission rates. Time to dose escalation, treatment persistence and safety profile were comparable between both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

this long-term real-life experience provides additional evidence of the similarity of O- and B-IFX CTP-13 in terms of efficacy and safety in IBD patients.

DISCONTINUATION RATES FOLLOWING A SWITCH FROM A REFERENCE TO A BIOSIMILAR BIOLOGIC IN PATIENTS WITH INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASE: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

BACKGROUND

Biologics have revolutionized the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). However, these drugs had a significant influence on treatment-related costs, which resulted in the development of biosimilars.

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the drug discontinuation rate in the IBD population who switched from originator to biosimilars in real-world switching studies and address potential nocebo effects as reasons for drug discontinuation.

METHODS

Medline (via PubMed), EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and abstract databases of selected congresses were screened for reports of monoclonal antibody (mAb) switching with a minimum post-switch follow-up of >6 months or three infusions. All available information on discontinuation rates was assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 30 observational studies were included, involving 3,594 patients with IBD. Twenty-six studies reported a switch from infliximab to CT-P13, two studies involved a switch to SB2, and switching information was not available in two studies. The discontinuation rates were 8%, 14%, and 21% at 6, 12, and 24 months, respectively. The main reasons for drug discontinuation and their respective risks were: disease worsening (2%), remission (4%), loss of adherence (4%), adverse events (5%), and loss of response (7%). The quality of the evidence ranged from low to very low depending on the outcome analyzed. Subjective symptoms leading to drug discontinuation were infrequently reported, and the nocebo effect was clearly assessed in just one of the included papers.

CONCLUSION

Discontinuation rates following a switch to a biosimilar in patients with IBD increase over time. However, it was not possible to confirm the nocebo effect as a reason for discontinuation. Therefore, long-term studies evaluating the use of biosimilars to monitor adverse events and potential nocebo effects in post-marketing surveillance are still needed.

The Challenges of Switching Therapies in an Evolving Multiple Biosimilars Landscape: A Narrative Review of Current Evidence

With the increasing availability of biosimilars, the practice of switching therapies for non-medical reasons between an originator biologic and an analogous biosimilar has become more common. The evidence to support this practice mostly comes from single-switch randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and real-world (RW) evidence studies. However, as more biosimilars of the same originator enter the market, multiple switching events between originators and biosimilars is becoming a reality, despite limited evidence to support the efficacy and safety of such practice. Some countries have established guidelines, policies, or laws related to interchangeability and/or automatic substitution, whereas others have left these practices unregulated or controlled by other components of the healthcare system. Collectively, guidelines on single non-medical switching are often vague, with even less focus given to multiple non-medical switching, leaving this practice mostly unregulated. This narrative review will first discuss the current regulatory perspectives on non-medical switching and challenges associated with switching therapies, particularly with the availability of multiple biosimilars. We will then review the current evidence from RCTs and RW studies in the light of three different multiple-switch scenarios currently taking place in clinical practice: switching between an originator and a single biosimilar, switching between biosimilars of the same originator, and the clinical practice of switching back to the originator (i.e., switchbacks) after a failure of the initial non-medical switch to the analogous biosimilar.

Biosimilars in inflammatory bowel disease

The advent of biologics has changed outcomes in many chronic conditions, including inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Biologics have been used for the induction and remission of ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease for almost two decades and are effective in patients who used to fail conventional treatment with steroids, immunomodulators. The use of biologics in the treatment of IBD has increased over the last few years, partly due to the rise in its incidence and the use of biologics as a first-line treatment in severe disease as well as in complicated diseases like penetrating/fistulating Crohn's disease. However, their use is associated with a significant burden to the society with respect to healthcare costs, resulting in the premature discontinuation of therapy in some patients, leading to exacerbations and complications. The introduction of biosimilars a decade ago seems to be a promising approach to reducing the costs related to therapy. Since their introduction, numerous studies conducted in adults and some in children show the efficacy of biosimilars with a similar side-effect profile to biologics. This review discusses the history of biosimilars in the treatment of IBD, enumerates several such studies and discusses the possibility of using biosimilars in the future.

Challenges for biosimilars: focus on rheumatoid arthritis

Healthcare systems worldwide are struggling to find ways to fund the cost of innovative treatments such as gene therapies, regenerative medicine, and monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). As the world's best known mAbs are close to facing patent expirations, the biosimilars market is poised to grow with the hope of bringing prices down for cancer treatment and autoimmune disorders, however, this has yet to be realized. The development costs of biosimilars are significantly higher than their generic equivalents due to therapeutic equivalence trials and higher manufacturing costs. It is imperative that academics and relevant companies understand the costs and stages associated with biologics processing. This article brings these costs to the forefront with a focus on biosimilars being developed for Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA). mAbs have remarkably changed the treatment landscape, establishing their superior efficacy over traditional small chemicals. Five blockbuster TNFα mAbs, considered as first line biologics against RA, are either at the end of their patent life or have already expired and manufacturers are seeking to capture a significant portion of that market. Although in principle, market-share should be available, withstanding that the challenges regarding the compliance and regulations are being resolved, particularly with regards to variation in the glycosylation patterns and challenges associated with manufacturing. Glycan variants can significantly affect the quality attributes requiring characterization throughout production. Successful penetration of biologics can drive down prices and this will be a welcome change for patients and the healthcare providers. Herein we review the biologic TNFα inhibitors, which are on the market, in development, and the challenges being faced by biosimilar manufacturers.

An updated review of infliximab biosimilar, CT-P13, in the treatment of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases

The introduction of anti-TNFs, such as infliximab (IFX), has revolutionized the treatment of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. Anti-TNF agents have shown outstanding efficacy and long-term improvement of clinical outcomes, but the cost has been relatively high. Out of this concern, several 'biosimilar' drugs of anti-TNF agents have been developed. CT-P13, the first biosimilar of reference IFX, was approved by the European Medicines Agency and licensed by the US FDA for use in all indications of IFX. This updated review summarizes all aspects of CT-P13, including pharmacology and pharmacokinetics, and evaluates its efficacy, safety and immunogenicity for all indications based on the results of the latest clinical trials as well as on real-world experiences.

Real-Life Comparison of Different Anti-TNF Biologic Therapies for Ulcerative Colitis Treatment: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Head-to-head comparison studies evaluating the effectiveness and tolerability of anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) drugs in inflammatory bowel disease patients are lacking.

AIM

To compare the effectiveness and tolerability of anti-TNF-α drugs used in clinical practice in a cohort of patients with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis (UC).

METHODS

Retrospectively, 122 UC patients treated with infliximab (IFX) originator and biosimilar, adalimumab (ADA), and golimumab (GOL) were included. We performed an ITT analysis to evaluate clinical response and remission, steroid-free clinical remission, and endoscopy response according to the different time points of the follow-up. Baseline and post induction predictor factors of these outcomes were evaluated using multivariate logistic regression models. Moreover, a propensity score-based weighting analysis was performed. Data were analyzed using R and STATA11 software.

RESULTS

The overall clinical response was 77% after induction, 81.4% at 30 weeks, and 76.9% at 52 weeks, while the steroid-free clinical remission was 39.7, 46, and 54.6%, respectively. After induction, a higher rate of treatment failure was observed in the GOL group. At the end of follow-up, lower rates of steroid-free clinical remission and clinical response were obtained by GOL. At week 52, endoscopic response was achieved by 46.5% of the population.

CONCLUSIONS

Among the different anti-TNF treatments, moderate-to-severe UC seems to respond better to IFX and ADA, whereas GOL seems to be less effective, despite a similar good safety profile.

Knowledge and Viewpoints on Biosimilar Monoclonal Antibodies among Asian Physicians: Comparison with European Physicians

Background/Aims

Current knowledge and viewpoints regarding biosimilars among physicians in Asia are unknown, even though these were investigated by European Crohn's and Colitis Organization (ECCO) members in 2013 and 2015. Thus, this study conducted a multinational survey to assess the awareness of biosimilar monoclonal antibodies among Asian physicians.

Methods

A 17-question multiple-choice anonymous web survey was conducted with the logistic support of the Asian Organization of Crohn's and Colitis (AOCC). Randomly selected AOCC members were invited by e-mail to participate between February 24, 2017 and March 26, 2017.

Results

In total, 151 physicians from eight Asian countries responded to the survey. Most of the participants were gastroenterologists (96.6%), and 77.5% had cared for inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) patients for more than 5 years. The majority of the respondents (66.2%) were aware that a biosimilar is similar but not equivalent to the originator. The majority of respondents (77.5%) considered cost saving to be the main advantage of biosimilars, but a high percentage of respondents (38.4%) were concerned about a different immunogenicity from that of the originator (92.4% and 27.1% respectively in ECCO 2015). Only 19.2% considered that the originator and biosimilars were interchangeable, and only 6.0% felt very confident in the use of biosimilars (44.4% and 28.8% respectively in ECCO 2015).

Conclusions

Asian gastroenterologists in 2017 are generally well informed about biosimilars. On the other hand, compared to the ECCO members surveyed in 2015, Asian gastroenterologists had more concerns and less confidence about the use of biosimilars in clinical practice. Thus, IBD-specific data on the comparison of the efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity in Asian patients are needed.

Nonmedical Switching From Originators to Biosimilars: Does the Nocebo Effect Explain Treatment Failures and Adverse Events in Rheumatology and Gastroenterology?

The act of nonmedical switching, defined as switching stable patients who are generally doing well with their current therapy from an originator biologic to its biosimilar, has been endorsed as a reasonable treatment strategy. The safety and efficacy of nonmedical switching have been evaluated in randomized controlled and real-world evidence studies, which have demonstrated that although many patients maintain treatment response after the switch, some patients experience therapy failure, resulting in therapy discontinuation. It has been postulated that the vast majority, if not all, of these treatment failures result from a "nocebo effect", defined as patients' negative expectations toward the therapy change. Reports suggest that the risk of a nocebo effect is higher following a mandated nonmedical switch. Although the nocebo effect is a well-recognized phenomenon in pain studies, evidence is limited in immune-mediated diseases primarily because it is difficult to quantify, especially retrospectively. In spite of this, numerous biosimilar studies in patients with immune-mediated diseases have concluded that nonmedical switching failures are due to a nocebo effect. The objective of this narrative review was to explore the reasons for nonmedical switch failure or discontinuation and the role of the nocebo effect among patients with inflammatory rheumatic and gastrointestinal diseases who switched from an originator biologic to its biosimilar.

Biosimilars: concept, current status, and future perspectives in inflammatory bowel diseases

The inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), which consist of Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis, are chronic, incurable immunemediated inflammatory disorders of the intestine. As IBD incidence continues to increase globally and its mortality is low, prevalent cases of IBD are rapidly increasing, thereby leading to a substantial increase in health care costs. Although the introduction of biologic agents for IBD management has revolutionized the armamentarium of IBD therapy, the high cost of this therapy is concerning. With the expirations of patents for existing biologic agents (originals), biosimilars with cheaper costs have been highlighted in the field of IBD. Despite concerns regarding their short- and long-term efficacy, safety, immunogenicity, and interchangeability, increasing evidence via prospective observations and phase III or IV clinical trials, which aim to prove the "biosimilarity" of biosimilars to originals, has partly confirmed their efficacy, safety, and interchangeability. Additionally, although patients and physicians are reluctant to use biosimilars, a positive budget impact has been reported owing to their use in different countries. In the near future, multiple biosimilars with lower costs, and efficacy and safety profile similar to originals, could be used to treat IBD; thus, further consideration and knowledge dissemination are warranted in this new era of biosimilars.

Systematic Review: Non-medical Switching of Infliximab to CT-P13 in Inflammatory Bowel Disease

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Biosimilar approval, such as Inflectra™ (CT-P13) for treating ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD), has reduced direct drug costs. Though clinicians are comfortable with biosimilar use in treatment-naïve patients, there are concerns in some jurisdictions that there are insufficient data from well-controlled trials to support non-medical switching. A systematic review, along with a critical assessment of the study design, was conducted to assess the potential impact of switching stable CD/UC patients from infliximab to CT-P13.

METHODS

A literature search using PubMed and abstracts/posters from 3 major gastroenterology conferences from 2014 to 2018 was completed. Two individual reviewers extracted data from each relevant report and compiled it into evidence tables to facilitate descriptive analyses. Key randomized trial and observational study designs were critically assessed to contextualize data relevance.

RESULTS

A total of 49 reports (3 randomized controlled trials, 40 observational trials, and 1 case series) were included. Most studies revealed no efficacy, safety, or immunogenicity concerns with non-medical switch. Limitations of supporting data include a small number of randomized controlled trials; predominance of observational studies with varying outcome assessments and lack of appropriate controls; and scarcity of research on biosimilar switch long-term effects.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of studies suggested non-medical switch is safe. However, clinicians and regulatory bodies should be aware of differences and limitations in study designs when making inferences about the risks and benefits of switching stable IBD patients to biosimilars.

An updated systematic review and meta-analysis about the safety and efficacy of infliximab biosimilar, CT-P13, for patients with inflammatory bowel disease

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of infliximab biosimilar, CT-P13, for patients with inflammatory bowel disease.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Scopus, Ovid, and Web of Science for relevant clinical trials discussing CT-P31 administration for IBD patients either naïve to biological therapy or switched from IFX therapy. Data of the rates of clinical response, clinical remission, and adverse events were extracted and pooled in a random effect model meta-analysis using CMA version 2.

RESULTS

Thirty-two studies with a total of 3464 IBD patients treated with CT-P13 were identified. The pooled rates of clinical response among Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) at 8-14 weeks were 0.81 (95% CI = 0.72 to 0.87) and 0.68 (95% CI = 0.63 to 0.72), respectively, and at 48-63 weeks were 0.69 (95% CI = 0.48 to 0.85) and 0.54 (95% CI = 0.45 to 0.63) respectively. After switching from IFX to CT-P13, the pooled rates of sustained clinical response among CD and UC at 30-32 weeks were 0.84 (95% CI = 0.57 to 0.96) and 0.96 (95% CI = 0.58 to 0.99), respectively, and at 48-63 weeks were 0.51 (95% CI = 0.22 to 0.79) and 0.83 (95% CI = 0.19 to 0.99) respectively. Moreover, adverse events were reported (CD = 0.10, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.22; UC = 0.18, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.15).

CONCLUSION

CT-P13 is effective and well tolerated in short and long-term periods. Switching to CT-P13 is recommended for the management of IBD.

Long-term efficacy and safety of CT-P13, a biosimilar of infliximab, in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: A retrospective multicenter study

BACKGROUND AND AIM

A biosimilar of infliximab, CT-P13 (Remsima®) has the potential to reduce treatment costs and enhance access to biological therapy for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients. However, long-term clinical data on its use for IBD treatment are currently sparse. We aimed to investigate the long-term efficacy and safety of CT-P13 therapy in a large, real-life IBD cohort.

METHODS

A total of 368 IBD patients (227 with Crohn's disease [CD] and 141 with ulcerative colitis [UC]) treated with CT-P13 at 16 referral hospitals in Korea between July 2012 and December 2017 were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

The cumulative retention rates at years 1, 3, and 5 were 86.1%, 68.5%, and 58.7% and 69.7%, 46.0%, and 26.7% in anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-naïve CD and UC patients, respectively. The clinical response and remission rates at week 14 and at years 1, 3, and 5 were 94.3%, 92.7%, 76.8%, and 17.6% and 78.6%, 82.4%, 72.2%, and 17.6% in anti-TNF-naïve CD and 85.6%, 80.0%, 55.2%, and 6.7% and 42.6%, 59.8%, 44.2%, and 6.7% in anti-TNF-naïve UC patients, respectively. Among patients who switched from the biologic originator to CT-P13, the cumulative retention rates at years 1, 3, and 5 were 88.5%, 66.1%, and 44.8% in CD, and 73.9%, 42.5%, and 42.5% in UC patients, respectively. Significant improvements in disease activity scores were accompanied by marked reductions in inflammatory marker levels, and no unexpected adverse events including death or malignancy occurred during the study period.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term treatment with CT-P13 is effective in inducing and maintaining disease improvement and is well-tolerated in patients with IBD. CT-P13 may be a promising treatment option for IBD.

CT-P13: a review on a biosimilar to infliximab in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease

Introduction: CT-P13 was developed as an infliximab biosimilar in 2013. The primary structure of CT-P13 is identical to that of original infliximab and it has highly similar higher order structure, physiochemical characteristics, and biological properties. To date, data from real-life cohorts and randomized controlled trials show comparable clinical efficacy, safety and immunogenicity of biosimilar CT-P13, and the original reference medicinal Product (RMP). Areas covered: This article reviews the comparability of CT-P13 and the RMP and focuses on the emerging clinical trial and observational cohorts data on efficacy and safety of CT-P13 in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients. The development of a subcutaneous formulation of Infliximab CT-P13 is also addressed. Expert opinion: There is a plethora of evidence to show CT-P13 is non-inferior to infliximab RMP in IBD and that a switch from RMP to this biosimilar is feasible and safe. However, interchangeability and multiple switches can still not be endorsed for introduction into clinical practice.

Consensus report: clinical recommendations for the prevention and management of the nocebo effect in biosimilar-treated IBD patients

BACKGROUND

The nocebo effect is a negative effect of a pharmacological or nonpharmacological medical treatment that is induced by patients' expectations, and that is unrelated to the physiological action of the treatment. The nocebo effect can negatively affect treatment outcomes.

AIM

To develop evidence-based consensus recommendations for the prevention and management of the nocebo effect in biosimilar-treated patients with IBD.

METHODS

The "NOCE-BIO Consensus Group" was composed of 19 members from five European countries, and with different fields of expertise. A literature review on the nocebo effect, with specific focus on information about its prevention and management in biosimilar-treated IBD patients, was performed. Preliminary statements were formulated and voted on during a consensus group meeting held in Milan, Italy, in July 2018. A statement was accepted if >75% of participants voted 4 ("agree") or 5 ("strongly agree") on a scale of 1-5.

RESULTS

Consensus was reached on 11 recommendation statements. Seven statements reached consensus after one voting round and four statements reached consensus after two voting rounds. All statements were supported by very low-quality level of evidence. The panel agreed that patient-health-care provider relationship is a key driver of acceptance of biosimilars, which limits the risk of negative bias and the nocebo effect. Lack of knowledge among patients and health-care providers about the effectiveness and safety of biosimilars should be minimized. Education about biosimilars needs to be tailored to the individual patient, and positive framing is recommended.

CONCLUSIONS

The nocebo effect is under-recognised in the era of biosimilars, although it may negatively impact on the cost-savings of biosimilars. Future research should focus on the magnitude, the risk factors, the impact, and the management of the nocebo effect in biosimilars-treated IBD patients.

Infliximab biosimilar CT-P13 is effective and safe in treating inflammatory bowel diseases: a real-life multicenter, observational study in Italian primary inflammatory bowel disease centers

Background

The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of biosimilar infliximab (IFX) CT-P13 in treating outpatients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in Italian primary gastroenterology centers.

Methods

Consecutive IBD outpatients who completed the induction treatment were evaluated retrospectively. Clinical activity was scored according to the Mayo score for ulcerative colitis (UC) and to the Harvey-Bradshaw Index (HBI) for Crohn’s disease (CD). The primary endpoint was the achievement of clinical remission (Mayo score ≤2 in UC and HBI ≤5 in CD). Secondary endpoints were clinical response to treatment, achievement of mucosal healing, and safety.

Results

One hundred forty-one patients (96 UC and 45 CD) were enrolled. Previous treatment with anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF)α had been provided to 26% of UC patients and 28.9% of CD patients. Remission was achieved in 57.3% UC patients and in 75.6% CD patients during a median (interquartile range) follow up of 24 (6-24) months. Clinical response and mucosal healing were achieved in 87.5% and 75.0% of UC patients and in 84.4% and 84.2% of CD patients, respectively. By both univariate and multivariate analysis, age >40 years, presence of comorbidities, and naivety to anti-TNFα were significantly related to remission. Only one (0.7%) adverse event was reported in the CD group. Surgery was performed in 2.1% of UC patients and 6.7% of CD patients. Switching from IFX originator to biosimilar did not influence the maintenance of the clinical remission.

Conclusion

This study confirmed the long-term efficacy and safety of CT-P13 therapy in IBD, in both naïve patients and those switching from IFX originator.

Switching from infliximab to biosimilar in inflammatory bowel disease: overview of the literature and perspective

BACKGROUND

Biological therapy has revolutionized the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). After the expiration of patents for biological innovator products, development of biosimilars increased. CT-P13 was the first biosimilar approved for the same indications as the reference product; however, the approval was based on extrapolated data from rheumatoid arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis. Our aim was to review clinical studies about switching from originator infliximab (IFX-O) to biosimilar infliximab (IXF-B) in IBD, focusing on recently published data and the future of biosimilars.

METHODS

The PubMed database was searched for original articles published up to 1 December 2018 reporting data on IFX-B in IBD.

RESULTS

A total of 29 studies assessing switching from IFX-O to IFX-B, 14 assessing induction therapy with IFX-B were found. Efficacy, safety and immunogenicity were discussed. Studies confirm that CT-P13 is safe and equally efficient as the reference product for both induction and maintenance therapy; and that switching from the reference product to biosimilar is non-inferior to continuous biosimilar use. However, efficacy and safety data on Flixabi (SB2) in IBD patients is lacking.

CONCLUSION

Switching from the originator to a biosimilar in patients with IBD is acceptable, although scientific and clinical evidence is lacking regarding reverse switching, multiple switching and cross-switching among biosimilars in IBD patients.

Biosimilars for the Management of Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: Economic Considerations

Biological drugs revolutionized the treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) such as Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis. However, not all clinically eligible patients have access to biologicals due to significant costs and budget impact. Biosimilars are highly comparable to their originator product in terms of clinical efficacy and safety. Biosimilars are priced 15-75% lower than their reference product, which makes them a less costly alternative and is expected to offer better patients access to biologicals. The total projected cost savings are significant. If the achieved budget savings were used to cover more biological therapy, several additional IBD patients could be treated. Currently, the main barriers to the increasing uptake of biosimilars are the few incentives of the key stakeholders, while physicians' and patients' skepticism towards biosimilars seems to be changing. Over the coming years, biosimilars are expected to gain a growing importance in the treatment of IBD, contributing to a better access to treatment, improving population-level health gain and sustainability of health systems. This review summarizes the results of the literature on the economic considerations of biosimilars in IBD and the role of biosimilar infliximab in the treatment of IBD.

Anti-TNF Biosimilars in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Searching the Proper Patient's Profile

Biosimilars of infliximab (CT-P13) are currently approved and available for the same indications as for the originator. Some concerns about safety and immunogenicity have risen in the past because of lack of data in IBD. Since 2015, several cohort studies have been conducted in IBD showing that CT-P13 has comparable safety and efficacy profile to the originator, both in adult and pediatric population, either in naïve patients or even in those who switched from the originator to CT-P13. This review aims to analyze the current literature data in order to define a clear patient profile, to identify those IBD patients who would benefit the most from the use of CT-P13.

Infliximab in inflammatory bowel disease

Anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy has revolutionized the medical treatment of the inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), Crohn’s disease (CD), and ulcerative colitis. Twenty years ago, infliximab became the first anti-TNF agent approved for IBD. Data from randomized controlled trials, large observational cohort studies, postmarketing registries, and meta-analyses show that infliximab is a very effective treatment for moderate to severe IBD with a good safety profile. Infliximab has been also used to treat pouchitis following an ileal pouch–anal anastomosis (IPAA) after restorative proctocolectomy and to prevent postoperative recurrence following an ileocolonic resection for CD with good results. Nevertheless, up to 30% of patients show no clinical benefit following induction and up to 50% lose response over time. Both these unwanted outcomes can be largely explained by inadequate drug concentrations and frequently by the development of antibodies to infliximab. Loss of response can be managed efficiently and often prevented by applying therapeutic drug monitoring. Recently, the first biosimilars of infliximab have been approved and are utilized in clinical practice with comparable efficacy and safety with the originator. This review will mainly focus on the efficacy of infliximab in IBD.

Knowledge and use of biosimilars in oncology: a survey by the European Society for Medical Oncology

Background

Biosimilars can potentially improve the sustainability of cancer care; however, uptake is sometimes limited by safety concerns and a lack of understanding of the concept of extrapolation. The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) conducted a survey to assess the current level of knowledge, understanding and comfort of use of biosimilars among prescribers specialised in oncology.

Methods

A 19-question survey was developed using the SurveyMonkey online platform (https://www.surveymonkey.com/). Data collection occurred between September and October 2017 and included paper and online responses.

Results

Overall, 393 responses were received from prescribers. Overall, 49.0% of prescribers use biosimilars in clinical practice and most (79.2%) rate their general knowledge of biosimilars as average to very high. Potential increased risk of immunogenicity remains a significant concern of switching. Gaps in knowledge identified by the survey include biosimilar development, clinical trial design and endpoint selection, and requirements for extrapolation, which should form the focus of future educational initiatives. A substantial demand remains for further educational activities with equal preference for online and face-to-face initiatives. A higher rate of biosimilar use (56.3% vs 46.5%), knowledge of biosimilar development and trial design, and comfort with extrapolation, but a lower knowledge of European Medicines Agency definitions, was found among prescribers from Asia-Pacific versus those from Europe.

Conclusion

Encouraging levels of prescriber use and general knowledge of biosimilars were found, but a substantial need for further education remains. Efforts should be made worldwide to align terms, definitions and guidelines for the development and approval of biosimilars.

Switching from reference infliximab to CT-P13 in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: results of a multicenter study after 12 months

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

infliximab has changed the natural history of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The advent of biosimilar treatments such as CT-P13 will hopefully improve the availability of biological therapies. Data with regard to drug switching are currently limited. The objective of the study was to assess the effectiveness and safety of switching from the reference product (RP), infliximab, to CT-P13 in patients with IBD.

METHODS

this was a multicenter prospective observational study in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC). All patients had switched from infliximab RP (Remicade®) to CT-P13 treatment and were followed up for 12 months. The efficacy endpoint was the change in clinical remission assessed at 0 and 12 months, according to the Harvey-Bradshaw score and partial Mayo score for patients with CD and UC, respectively. Adverse events were monitored and recorded throughout the study.

RESULTS

a total of 167 patients (116 CD/51 UC) were included; 88.8% (103/116) of patients with CD were in remission at the time of the drug switch and 69.7% were in remission at 12 months. The Harvey-Bradshaw (HB) score significantly changed at 12 months (p = 0.001); 84.3% (43/51) of patients with UC were in remission at the time of the drug switch and 76.7% were in remission at 12 months. No significant changes in the median partial Mayo score (p = 0.87) were observed at 12 months. Serious adverse events related to medication were reported in 12/167 (7.2%) cases.

CONCLUSION

switching from infliximab RP to CT-P13 is safe and effective at 12 months. The loss of efficacy at 12 months was 15.7%.

Characteristics of biological therapy in pediatric patients with Crohn's disease

INTRODUCTION

At present, there is a significant amount of data related to biologics used in pediatric patients with Crohn's disease. This review characterizes the different biological drugs administered in this population.

AREAS COVERED

Biological therapy of CD, focusing on children, is summarized in this review. After mechanism of action and pharmacokinetics are described, mucosal healing on anti-TNF therapy, aspects of early therapy, long-term outcome and combination therapy are discussed. Moreover, loss of response and treatment optimization, as well as drug withdrawal are summarized. Subsequently, perianal disease and surgical aspects are discussed followed by safety issues. In addition, new drugs (vedolizumab, ustekinumab), cost-effectiveness and administration of biosimilars were also included.

EXPERT COMMENTARY

There are significant data to characterize biological drugs administered in pediatric patients with Crohn's disease. However, head-to-head comparative studies using different biologics are missing.

Use of Biosimilars in Pediatric Inflammatory Bowel Disease: An Updated Position Statement of the Pediatric IBD Porto Group of ESPGHAN

Biologic therapies have changed the outcome of both adult and pediatric patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD). In September 2013, the first biosimilar of infliximab was introduced into the pharmaceutical market. In 2015, a first position paper on the use of biosimilars in pediatric IBD was published by the ESPGHAN IBD Porto group. Since then, more data have accumulated for both adults and children demonstrating biosimilars are an effective and safe alternative to the originator. In this updated position statement, we summarize current evidence and provide joint consensus statements regarding the recommended practice of biosimilar use in children with IBD.

Bioequivalence studies with anti-TNF biosimilars

Introduction: Biosimilars, as defined by the European Medicines Agency, have been used in Europe since 2006. The landscape was considerably expanded when the first biosimilar of a monoclonal was approved and introduced in the European market. CT-P13 was developed by Celltrion as an infliximab biosimilar in 2013, not without controversy. As these complex molecules cannot be completely identical, some experts, clinicians, and even patients were skeptical regarding the real bioequivalence of the drugs. Currently, several new infliximab and adalimumab biosimilars are available or will reach the market in a few months. Areas covered: Our goal is to review, mainly from a clinical perspective, the available evidence for bioequivalence of anti-TNF biosimilars. We aim to take into account not only preclinical studies, mostly done for regulatory issues, but also data from clinical studies. Expert opinion: We can conclude that bioequivalence with originator is well demonstrated in those drugs which have followed European Medicines Agency regulatory pathways. Switching from originator to biosimilar appears safe for all indications. However, there are few data available for switching from one biosimilar to another, or for complete interchangeability. Prospective studies and strict pharmacovigilance are recommended.

The Biosimilar Nocebo Effect? A Systematic Review of Double-Blinded Versus Open-Label Studies

BACKGROUND

Several authors have hypothesized that adverse drug events (ADEs) upon switching from reference biologics to biosimilar products are related to the nocebo effect. However, a thorough and current review of the existing literature has not been conducted.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate if patient and/or physician knowledge of a switch from a reference biologic product to a biosimilar product was associated with an increase in ADEs likely to be susceptible to the nocebo effect.

METHODS

Studies reporting efficacy and safety outcomes of a switch from a reference product to a biosimilar product were reviewed. Biologics with FDA-approved biosimilars in the United States were considered for review, including adalimumab, bevacizumab, etanercept, and infliximab. Studies were identified by searching controlled vocabulary (e.g., MeSH terms) and keywords within MEDLINE (via PubMed) and Embase. Descriptive statistics were used to quantify subjective and objective complications in double-blinded and single-blinded or open-label studies.

RESULTS

Thirty-one trials including 3,271 patients were reviewed in the full analysis. Median discontinuation rates for any reason were 14.3% (range = 0.0-33.3) in open-label studies compared with 6.95% (range = 5.2-11.0) in double-blinded studies. Discontinuation rates for ADEs were 5.6% (range = 0.0-24.2) in open-label studies versus 3.1% (range = 2.0-5.2) in double-blinded studies, suggesting the nocebo effect does affect biosimilar adoption. Subgroup analyses of antidrug antibody (ADA) development and infusion reactions were similar between infliximab open-label and double-blinded studies. Discontinuation rates for any reason, for ADEs, and for lack of efficacy were generally higher in infliximab open-label trials compared with double-blinded trials. Etanercept biosimilar discontinuation rates for any reason were similar between study designs; however, incidences of injection site reactions and discontinuation rates for ADEs were higher in double-blinded compared with open-label study designs.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence is insufficient to confirm a biosimilar nocebo effect, although higher discontinuation rates in infliximab biosimilar open-label studies support this theory. Further studies are needed to evaluate the existence of a biosimilar nocebo effect.

DISCLOSURES

No outside funding supported this study. The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Loss of efficacy and safety of the switch from infliximab original to infliximab biosimilar (CT-P13) in patients with inflammatory bowel disease

BACKGROUND

Infliximab original has changed the natural history of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) over the past two decades. However, the recent expiration of its patent has allowed the entry of the first Infliximab biosimilar into the European and Spanish markets. Currently switching drugs data in IBD are limited.

AIM

To compare the efficacy of infliximab biosimilar, CT-P13, against infliximab original, analyzing the loss of response of both at the 12 mo follow-up in patients with IBD.

METHODS

An observational study of two cohorts has been conducted. One retrospective cohort that included patients with IBD treated with Infliximab original, and a prospective cohort of patients who were switching from infliximab original to infliximab biosimilar (CT-P13). We had analyzed the overall efficacy and loss of efficacy in patients in remission at the end of one year after treatment with the original drug compared to the results of the year of treatment with the biosimilar.

RESULTS

98 patients (CD 67, CU 31) were included in both cohorts. The overall efficacy for infliximab original per year of treatment was 71% vs 68.2% for infliximab biosimilar (P = 0.80). The loss of overall efficacy at 12 mo for infliximab original was 6.6% vs 14.5% for infliximab biosimilar (P = 0.806). The loss of efficacy in patients who were in basal remission was 16.3% for infliximab original vs 27.1% for infliximab biosimilar. Adverse events were 9.2% for infliximab original vs 11.2% for infliximab biosimilar.

CONCLUSION

The overall efficacy and loss of treatment response with infliximab biosimilar (CT-P13) is similar to that observed with infliximab original in patients who were switching at the 12 mo follow-up. There is no difference in the rate of adverse events.

WITHDRAWN:Knowledge and viewpoints on biosimilar monoclonal antibodies from members of the Asian Organization of Crohn's and Colitis: comparison with European Crohn's and Colitis members

Ahead of Print article withdrawn by publisher.

Infliximab biosimilar CT-P13 therapy is effective in maintaining endoscopic remission in ulcerative colitis - results from multicenter observational cohort

BACKGROUND

CT-P13, the first biosimilar monoclonal antibody to infliximab (IFX), has previously been confirmed to be efficacious in inducing mucosal healing in ulcerative colitis (UC) patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of CT-P13 therapy in maintaining mucosal healing in UC.

METHODS

CT-P13 trough levels, antibody positivity, serum inflammatory markers as CRP level, fecal calprotectin at weeks 14 and 54, concomitant steroid and azathioprine therapy at the time of induction therapy and at weeks 14 and 54, previous use of anti TNF drug and the need of dose intensification as possible predictive factors for mucosal healing at week 54 were evaluated in this prospective study.

RESULTS

61 patients had already completed the 54-week treatment period. Mucosal healing was shown in 65.5 % and 62.1 %, complete mucosal healing was present in 31% and 38 % at week 14 and 54, respectively. The median values of CRP, leukocytes, thrombocytes, and albumin showed significant difference between baseline and week 54. Serum antibody positivity was proved in 6.5 % and 19.7 % of cases at week 14 and 54, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our study confirmed the long-term efficacy of CT-P13 therapy on mucosal healing in UC.

Update on biosimilars in inflammatory bowel disease: Position and recommendations in Mexico

The biotechnology-derived medicines known as biosimilars are defined as non-originator treatments that have demonstrated quality, efficacy, and safety comparable to the reference biologic drug. Clinical trials have shown that the infliximab biosimilar, CT-P13, and the candidates for the adalimumab biosimilars, ABP 501 and ZRC 3197, are not significantly different, with respect to efficacy and safety, from the originator drugs in patients with other autoimmune diseases. However, controversy has arisen over the use of biosimilars in inflammatory bowel disease, due to the incipient evidence not only in patients with no previous biotechnology treatment, but also in patients in remission, that could be switched to a biosimilar for non-medical reasons. The present review is the first critical analysis by different specialists in the area of gastroenterology on the use of biosimilars in inflammatory bowel disease, the evidence on interchangeability, the extrapolation of indications, efficacy, safety, immunogenicity, and the clinical impact of the Mexican health regulations. The aim of our review was to make the positioning and recommendations of these new therapeutic options known, given that they have a potential cost-benefit for both patients and healthcare institutions.

The biosimilars journey: current status and ongoing challenges

Biosimilar products are already approved and marketed in several countries. The Food and Drug Administration has approved ten different biosimilars, and the European Medicines Agency has approved 40. Even though this scenario has provided important experience with biosimilar products, there are still challenges and unanswered questions. Up to now, a good amount of knowledge has been gathered in order to support the importance of the totality of evidence and the construction of a biosimilarity exercise for regulatory approval. In addition, the extrapolation of indications has been proved viable when a careful analysis is performed. The models for clinical trials and the use of the most sensible populations have been extensively discussed, and there is apparent homogeneity in manufacturer choices for study designs. However, some challenges remain. The lack of regulatory harmony, especially concerning naming, the marketed intended copies, the interchangeability, and the biosimilars in orphan diseases are some of those and are the focus of discussion in this review.

Non-medical Switching from Originator Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors to Their Biosimilars: Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials and Real-World Studies

Tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors are widely used biologics for the treatment of several chronic inflammatory diseases. The launch of anti-TNF biosimilars has introduced the possibility of non-medical switching between originator biologics and their biosimilars. However, the potential clinical and patient-reported consequences of non-medical switching remain largely unknown, as much of the evidence comes from poorly or uncontrolled real-world evidence (RWE) studies that often have an element of bias and nonstandardized outcome measures. To appropriately evaluate the safety, efficacy, and immunogenicity of non-medical switching from an originator to its biosimilar, we propose that seven key study design elements should be considered when assessing the existing evidence: studies should be (1) randomized and double-blind, (2) adequately controlled, and (3) adequately powered; include (4) multiple switching, (5) an assessment of immunogenicity, and (6) adequate follow-up duration; and (7) report individual patient-level outcomes. This systematic review assessed the robustness and consistency of the current non-medical switching evidence, with a focus on TNF inhibitors. A comprehensive literature search (January 2012-February 2018) identified 98 publications corresponding to 91 studies (17 randomized controlled trials and 74 RWE studies) describing non-medical switching from a TNF inhibitor originator to its biosimilar. When assessing the totality of this evidence, none of the non-medical switching studies conducted to date were found to use all seven of the key design elements, and the absence of these elements dilutes the robustness of the data. Furthermore, discontinuation rates varied widely among studies (0-87%), suggesting heterogeneity and inconclusiveness of the current efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity evidence, particularly at an individual patient level. Therefore, patients should not be indiscriminately switched from an originator TNF inhibitor to its biosimilar for non-medical reasons. Switching decisions should remain between the treating physicians and their patients and be made on a case-by-case basis, relying upon robust scientific evidence.

FUNDING

AbbVie.Plain Language Summary: Plain language summary available for this article.

Positioning of old and new biologicals and small molecules in the treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases

The past decade has brought substantial advances in the management of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). The introduction of tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists, evidence for the value of combination therapy, the recognition of targeting lymphocyte trafficking and activation as a viable treatment, and the need for early treatment of high-risk patients are all fundamental concepts for current modern IBD treatment algorithms. In this article, authors review the existing data on approved biologicals and small molecules as well as provide insight on the current positioning of approved therapies. Patient stratification for the selection of specific therapies, therapeutic targets and patient monitoring will be discussed as well. The therapeutic armamentarium for IBD is expanding as novel and more targeted therapies become available. In the absence of comparative trials, positioning these agents is becoming difficult. Emerging concepts for the future will include an emphasis on the development of algorithms which will facilitate a greater understanding of the positioning of novel biological drugs and small molecules in order to best tailor therapy to the patient. In the interim, anti-TNF therapy remains an important component of IBD therapy with the most real-life evidence and should be considered as first-line therapy in patients with complicated Crohn’s disease and in acute-severe ulcerative colitis. The safety and efficacy of these ‘older’ anti-TNF therapies can be optimized by adhering to therapeutic algorithms which combine clinical and objective markers of disease severity and response to therapy.