Biosimilar SB11 versus reference ranibizumab in neovascular age-related macular degeneration: 1-year phase III randomised clinical trial outcomes

Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Ranibizumab Biosimilar for Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration and its Subtypes from the Societal and Patient Perspectives in Japan

INTRODUCTION

This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapies for subtypes of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) from the societal perspective, and for any nAMD from the patient perspective in Japan.

METHODS

A Markov model was developed to simulate the lifetime transitions of a cohort of patients with nAMD through various health states based on the involvement of nAMD, the treatment status, and decimal best-corrected visual acuity. Ranibizumab biosimilar was compared with aflibercept from the societal perspective regardless of treatment regimen for the analysis of three subtypes (typical nAMD, polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy (PCV), and retinal angiomatous proliferation (RAP)). Two analyses from the patient perspective focusing on the treat-and-extend regimens were performed, one with a cap on patients' copayments and one without. Ranibizumab biosimilar was compared with branded ranibizumab, aflibercept, aflibercept as the loading dose switching to ranibizumab biosimilar during maintenance (aflibercept switching to ranibizumab biosimilar), and best supportive care (BSC), for patients with any nAMD.

RESULTS

In the subtype analyses, ranibizumab biosimilar when compared with aflibercept resulted in incremental quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of - 0.015, 0.026, and 0.009, and the incremental costs of Japanese yen (JPY) - 50,447, JPY - 997,243, and JPY - 1,286,570 for typical nAMD, PCV, and RAP, respectively. From the patient perspective, ranibizumab biosimilar had incremental QALYs of 0.015, 0.009, and 0.307, compared with aflibercept, aflibercept switching to ranibizumab biosimilar, and BSC, respectively. The incremental costs for ranibizumab biosimilar over a patient lifetime excluding the cap on copayment were estimated to be JPY - 138,948, JPY - 391,935, JPY - 209,099, and JPY - 6,377,345, compared with branded ranibizumab, aflibercept, aflibercept switching to ranibizumab biosimilar, and BSC, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Ranibizumab biosimilar was demonstrated as a cost-saving option compared to aflibercept across all subtypes of nAMD, irrespective of the perspectives considered.

Usability of the SB11 Pre-filled Syringe (PFS) in Patients with Retinal Diseases

INTRODUCTION

SB11 (Byooviz™; Samsung Bioepis Co., Ltd.) is a ranibizumab (Lucentis®; Genentech, Inc.) biosimilar targeting vascular endothelial growth factor A for the treatment of retinal diseases. The pre-filled syringe (PFS) presentation of SB11 offers an alternative administration method to the vial, with the potential for enhanced safety and efficient syringe preparation. The objective of this study was to assess the ability of healthcare professionals (HCPs) to follow the instructions for use to prepare and administer SB11 PFS intravitreal (IVT) injections to patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) or macular edema secondary to retinal vein occlusion (RVO).

METHODS

This study was an open-label, single-arm, single-dose clinical study to evaluate the usability of the SB11 PFS in patients with nAMD or macular edema secondary to RVO. Four HCPs prepared and administered 0.5 mg SB11 PFS IVT injections to 34 patients. Product use task completion (12 tasks in total) was assessed by independent observers. Safety was assessed up to 7 days after injection of the investigational product.

RESULTS

A total of 34 patients were enrolled and completed the study. All 12 tasks were successfully completed in 34 (100%) patients without a use-related failure. Most patients (32 patients, 94.1%) experienced no adverse events (AEs), whereas 2 (5.9%) patients experienced three treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) which were mild to moderate in severity. There were no severe or serious TEAEs reported during the study.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that HCPs were able to successfully prepare and administer the SB11 PFS via IVT injection. No unexpected safety issues were identified. The SB11 PFS is a promising alternative for therapeutic administration of SB11 in patients with retinal disease.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT06176963; EudraCT number 2021-003566-12.

Biosimilars of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor for ophthalmic diseases: A review

The development of intravitreally injected biologic medicines (biologics) acting against vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) substantially improved the clinical outcomes of patients with common VEGF-driven retinal diseases. The relatively high cost of branded agents, however, represents a financial burden for most healthcare systems and patients, likely resulting in impaired access to treatment and poorer clinical outcomes for some patients. Biosimilar medicines (biosimilars) are clinically equivalent, potentially economic alternatives to reference products. Biosimilars approved by leading health authorities have been demonstrated to be similar to the reference product in a comprehensive comparability exercise, generating the totality of evidence necessary to support analytical, pre-clinical, and clinical biosimilarity. Anti-VEGF biosimilars have been entering the field of ophthalmology in the US since 2022. We review regulatory and scientific concepts of biosimilars, the biosimilar development landscape in ophthalmology, with a specific focus on anti-VEGF biosimilars, and discuss opportunities and challenges facing the uptake of biosimilars.

Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor biosimilars for neovascular age-related macular degeneration

RATIONALE

Neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is a progressive eye disease characterized by choroidal neovascularization (CNV) and is a leading cause of vision loss and disability worldwide. Although intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) therapy is an effective treatment option that helps to prevent vision loss or to improve visual acuity in people with neovascular AMD, treatment imposes a significant financial burden on patients and healthcare systems. A biosimilar is a biological product that has been developed to be nearly identical to a previously approved biological product. The use of biosimilars may help reduce costs and so may increase patient access to effective biologic medicines with similar levels of safety to the drugs on which they are based.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of anti-VEGF biosimilar agents compared with their corresponding anti-VEGF agents (i.e. the reference products) that have obtained regulatory approval for intravitreal injections in people with neovascular AMD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, two other databases, and two trials registries together with reference checking and contact with study authors to identify studies that are included in the review. The latest search date was 2 June 2023.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared approved anti-VEGF biosimilars with their reference products for treating the eyes of adult participants (≥ 50 years) who had an active primary or recurrent choroidal neovascularization lesion secondary to neovascular AMD.

OUTCOMES

Our outcomes were: best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central subfield thickness (CST), vision-related quality of life, serious ocular and non-ocular adverse events (AE), treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), anti-drug antibodies (ADAs), and serum concentrations of biosimilars and reference drugs.

RISK OF BIAS

We assessed the risk of bias (RoB) for seven outcomes reported in a summary of findings table by using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool.

SYNTHESIS METHODS

We synthesized results for each outcome using meta-analysis, where possible, by calculating risk ratios (RR) and mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes and continuous outcomes, respectively. Where this was not possible due to the nature of the data, we summarized the results narratively. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for prespecified outcomes.

INCLUDED STUDIES

We included nine parallel-group multi-center RCTs that enrolled a total of 3814 participants (3814 participating eyes), with sample sizes that ranged from 160 to 705 participants per study. The mean age of the participants in these studies ranged from 67 to 76 years, and the proportion of women ranged from 26.5% to 58.7%. Ranibizumab (Lucentis) was the reference product in seven studies, and aflibercept (Eyelea) was the reference product in two others. All the included studies had been supported by industry. The follow-up periods ranged from 12 to 52 weeks (median 48 weeks). Five studies (56%) were conducted in multi-country settings across Europe, North America and Asia, two studies in India, and one each in Japan and the Republic of Korea. We judged all the included studies to have met high methodological standards.

SYNTHESIS OF RESULTS

With regard to efficacy, our meta-analyses demonstrated that anti-VEGF biosimilars for neovascular AMD resulted in little to no difference compared with the reference products for BCVA change at 8 to 12 weeks (MD -0.55 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letters, 95% CI -1.17 to 0.07; 8 studies, 3603 participants; high-certainty evidence) and the proportion of participants who lost fewer than 15 letters in BCVA at 24 to 48 weeks (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.01; 7 studies, 2658 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Almost all participants (96.6% in the biosimilar group and 97.0% in the reference product group) lost fewer than 15 letters in BCVA. The evidence from two studies suggested that there was no evidence of difference between biosimilars and reference products in vision-related quality of life measured by the 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI-VFQ-25) summary scores at 24 to 48 weeks (MD 0.82, 95% CI -0.70 to 2.35; 2 studies, 894 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). With regard to the safety profile, meta-analyses also revealed little to no difference between anti-VEGF biosimilars and the reference products for the proportion of participants who experienced serious ocular AEs (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.68 to 2.26; 7 studies, 3292 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and for TEAEs leading to investigational product discontinuation or death (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.46; 8 studies, 3497 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Overall, 1.4% of participants in the biosimilar group and 1.2% in the reference product group experienced serious ocular adverse events. The most frequently documented serious ocular AEs were retinal hemorrhage and endophthalmitis. Although the evidence is of low certainty due to imprecision, meta-analysis suggested that anti-VEGF biosimilars led to no difference compared with the reference products for cumulative incidence of ADAs (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.22; 8 studies, 3066 participants; low-certainty evidence) or mean maximum serum concentrations (MD 0.42 ng/mL, 95% CI -0.22 to 1.05; subgroup of 3 studies, 100 participants; low-certainty evidence). We judged the overall risk of bias to be low for all studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In our review, low to high certainty evidence suggests that there is little to no difference, to date, between the anti-VEGF biosimilars approved for treating neovascular AMD and their reference products in terms of benefits and harms. While anti-VEGF biosimilars may be a viable alternative to reference products, current evidence for their use is based on a limited number of studies - particularly for comparison with aflibercept - with sparse long-term safety data, and infrequent assessment of quality of life outcomes. Our effect estimates and conclusions may be modified once findings have been reported from studies that are currently ongoing, and studies of biosimilar agents that are currently in development.

FUNDING

Cochrane Eyes and Vision US Project is supported by grant UG1EY020522, National Eye Institute, National Institutes of Health. Takeshi Hasegawa and Hisashi Noma were supported by Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (Grant numbers: 22H03554, 19K03092, 24K06239).

REGISTRATION

Protocol available via doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD015804.

Association of baseline factors with 1-year outcomes in the SB11-ranibizumab equivalence trial: A post hoc analysis

PURPOSE

To identify baseline factors associated with 1-year outcomes when treating neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) with ranibizumab biosimilar SB11 or reference ranibizumab (rRBZ), and to compare efficacy of the two products within subgroups judged to be clinically relevant.

DESIGN

Post hoc analysis of a prospective, equivalence phase 3 randomized clinical trial (RCT) METHODS: 705 patients with nAMD were randomized 1:1 to receive SB11 or rRBZ for 48 weeks. Pooled and randomized groups were used to identify baseline factors associated with clinical outcomes at Week 52 using multiple linear regression models. Significant factors identified in regression analyses were confirmed in analyses of variance. Subgroup analyses comparing best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) changes between SB11 and rRBZ were conducted.

RESULTS

634 (89.9%) participants completed the 52-week visit. Regression analyses showed that younger age, lower BCVA, and smaller total lesion area at baseline were associated with greater BCVA gain at Week 52, while older age, lower BCVA, and thicker central subfield thickness (CST) at baseline were predictors of greater CST reduction in the pooled group. Subgroup analyses demonstrated that BCVA outcomes appeared comparable for the SB11 and rRBZ groups.

CONCLUSION

Post hoc analyses of the SB11-rRBZ equivalence study showed that baseline age, BCVA, CST, and total lesion area were prognostic factors for visual or anatomical outcomes of nAMD, while subgroup analyses demonstrated comparable results for SB11 and rRBZ. Collectively, the results appear comparable to similar RCTs of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor reference products for nAMD and strengthen confidence in the biosimilarity of SB11.

Ocular Pharmacology

Treatment of ocular diseases presents unique challenges and opportunities for the clinician and for the clinical pharmacologist. Ophthalmic pharmaceuticals, typically given as liquids, require consideration of solubility, physiological pH, and osmolarity, as well as sterility and stability, which in turn requires optimal pharmaceutics. Ocular tissue levels are challenging to obtain in humans, and the clinical pharmacokinetics is typically blood levels, which are primarily related to safety, rather than efficacy. The eye is a closed compartment with multiple physiological barriers with esterases and transporters, but relatively little cytochrome oxidases. Delivery routes include topical, intravitreal, and systemic. Patient dosing involves not only adherence issues common to all chronic diseases, but also performance requirements on eye drop instillation. Therapeutically, ocular diseases and their pharmacological treatments include both those analogous to systemic diseases (e.g., inflammation, infection, and neuronal degeneration) and those unique to the eye (e.g., cataract and myopia).

Perspectives on the currently available pharmacotherapy for wet macular degeneration

INTRODUCTION

Wet age-related macular degeneration (w-AMD) is a leading cause of visual impairment globally, with its prevalence expected to rise alongside increasing life expectancy. The current standard treatment involves frequent intravitreal injections of anti-VEGF agents, which although revolutionary, pose significant burdens on both patients and healthcare services.

AREAS COVERED

This review explores current and emerging pharmaceutical treatments for w-AMD, focusing on their pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, efficacy, and safety. Promising developments include extending treatment intervals with newer anti-VEGF agents like brolucizumab and faricimab, biosimilars offering cost-effective options, and exploring innovative drug delivery methods such as subretinal gene therapy. Combination therapies, gene therapies, and novel agents like KSI-301 and OPT-302 show potential for improving treatment outcomes and reducing treatment burden.

EXPERT OPINION

While current treatments for w-AMD have significantly advanced with the advent of anti-VEGF therapies, their limitations in terms of treatment burden and incomplete responses have spurred research into diverse alternative approaches. These innovative strategies offer hope for improving patient outcomes and reducing healthcare burdens, suggesting a promising future for w-AMD management.

Systematic review of efficacy and meta-analysis of safety of ranibizumab biosimilars relative to reference ranibizumab anti-VEGF therapy for nAMD treatment

TOPIC

This systematic review and meta-analysis provides a summary of the efficacy and safety of ranibizumab biosimilars relative to reference ranibizumab anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapy for the treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD).

METHODS

We conducted systematic searches from January 2003 to August 2022 on Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials. We included studies reporting changes in early treatment diabetic retinopathy study-measured best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), number of patients who lost or gained more than 15 letters in BCVA from baseline, changes in retinal thickness and adverse events between treatment arms. The following studies were excluded: studies that did not report visual outcomes following biosimilar and reference ranibizumab intravitreal injections, study arms combining anti-VEGF agents with laser or steroid injections, sham injections as a control comparator, studies without English full texts and non-comparative, observational study design.

RESULTS

Five studies reported on four randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and 1544 eyes at baseline were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The studies in our systematic review found no significant differences between reference ranibizumab and ranibizumab biosimilar medications (FYB201, SB11, RanizuRel and Lupin's ranibizumab) for visual and anatomical outcomes. No significant differences were detected between biosimilar and reference ranibizumab for treatment emergent adverse events (risk ratio, RR 1.06, 95% CI (0.91 to 1.23), p=0.45, I²=52%) or IOP-related adverse events with significant heterogeneity (RR 2.59, 95% CI (0.11 to 62.25), p=0.56, I²=76%).

CONCLUSION

This systematic review of four RCTs demonstrated no significant difference in visual outcomes, retinal thickness outcomes, as well as meta-analysis of adverse events between biosimilar and reference ranibizumab therapies for nAMD treatment.

Ocular Delivery of Therapeutic Agents by Cell-Penetrating Peptides

Cell-penetrating peptides (CPPs) are short peptides with the ability to translocate through the cell membrane to facilitate their cellular uptake. CPPs can be used as drug-delivery systems for molecules that are difficult to uptake. Ocular drug delivery is challenging due to the structural and physiological complexity of the eye. CPPs may be tailored to overcome this challenge, facilitating cellular uptake and delivery to the targeted area. Retinal diseases occur at the posterior pole of the eye; thus, intravitreal injections are needed to deliver drugs at an effective concentration in situ. However, frequent injections have risks of causing vision-threatening complications. Recent investigations have focused on developing long-acting drugs and drug delivery systems to reduce the frequency of injections. In fact, conjugation with CPP could deliver FDA-approved drugs to the back of the eye, as seen by topical application in animal models. This review summarizes recent advances in CPPs, protein/peptide-based drugs for eye diseases, and the use of CPPs for drug delivery based on systematic searches in PubMed and clinical trials. We highlight targeted therapies and explore the potential of CPPs and peptide-based drugs for eye diseases.

Physicochemical and Biological Stability Assessment of SB11 (Ranibizumab Biosimilar) Under Ambient and In-Use Storage for Intravitreal Administration

INTRODUCTION

SB11 (Byooviz™) is a ranibizumab biosimilar that acts as a vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-A inhibitor. Stability data for unopened SB11 vials at room temperature are limited and no data are available for SB11 withdrawn into syringes (in-use) for intravitreal administration.

METHODS

SB11 stability was assessed in two different settings: unopened vials stored at 30 ± 2 °C/65 ± 5% relative humidity (RH) for 2 months, and in-use SB11 withdrawn into syringes stored at 5 ± 3 °C for 98 days and then 25 ± 2 °C/60 ± 5% RH for 24 h. The product was stored in the absence of light, and the experimental design followed International Conference on Harmonization and European Medicines Agency requirements for stability evaluation of biological products. Analysis included visual appearance (color, clarity, and presence of visible particles), pH, protein concentration (A₂₈₀) and purity (size-exclusion high-pressure liquid chromatography, capillary electrophoresis-sodium dodecyl sulfate, imaged capillary isoelectric focusing), biological activity (VEGF binding and neutralization), and safety (sub-visible particulates).

RESULTS

Except for charge variants in unopened vials at room temperature after 1 month by US standards, all results met the stability acceptance criteria (US and EU) for both unopened vials and for in-use SB11. There were no major changes in terms of physicochemical stability, biological activity and sub-visible particulates.

CONCLUSION

SB11 was stable for longer periods and at higher temperatures than what is stated in the labels of the reference product (Lucentis) and SB11. The physicochemical properties, biological activity, and sub-visible particulates of SB11 in both tested settings (unopened vials at room temperature and in-use product withdrawn into syringes) were maintained under the described storage periods. This information can help to avoid unnecessary delays in patient treatment without any loss in quality and biological activity, lower the workload of health care providers and reduce costs associated with drug waste.

Immunogenicity With Ranibizumab Biosimilar SB11 (Byooviz) and Reference Product Lucentis and Association With Efficacy, Safety, and Pharmacokinetics: A Post Hoc Analysis of a Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

SB11 and reference ranibizumab (RBZ) are monoclonal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-A antibodies approved for the treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) and other retinal diseases. The association of ranibizumab immunogenicity and treatment outcomes in patients with nAMD is unclear but relevant regarding concerns about immunogenicity of anti-VEGF biological products.

Objective

To examine the association of immunogenicity to ranibizumab products (SB11 and RBZ) with efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This was a post hoc analysis of a randomized, double-masked, parallel-group phase 3 equivalence study with participants from 75 centers in 9 countries conducted from March 14, 2018, to December 9, 2019. Included were participants 50 years or older with nAMD and active subfoveal choroidal neovascularization lesions.

Interventions

Intravitreal injection of SB11 or RBZ, 0.5 mg, every 4 weeks through week 48.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Serum antidrug antibodies (ADAs) were analyzed during the study period until week 52 to measure immunogenicity. Analyses were performed on immunogenicity (overall ADA positivity) with best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central subfield thickness (CST). Adverse events associated with intraocular inflammation (IOI) and serum ranibizumab levels were compared between overall ADA-positive and ADA-negative participants.

Results

A total of 705 participants (mean [SD] age, 74.1 [8.5] years; 403 female individuals [57.2%]) were included in the study. The overall incidence of ADA-positivity was 32 of 657 (4.9%) at week 52. The least-squares mean (SE) differences between overall ADA-positive and ADA-negative participants up to week 52 for BCVA and CST, respectively, were 1.6 (2.2) letters (95% CI, -2.7 to 5.8; P = .46) and 3 (13) μm (95% CI, -23 to 29; P = .83). IOI-related events occurred in 1 of 32 overall ADA-positive participants (3.1%) and 4 of 620 overall ADA-negative participants (0.6%). Mean (SD) serum ranibizumab concentrations over time were slightly lower in overall ADA-positive participants compared with those of ADA-negative participants, with a maximum value of 1389.3 (875.4) pg/mL at week 16 vs 1665.4 (1124.0) pg/mL at week 36, respectively.

Conclusions and Relevance

Results of this post hoc analysis of an equivalence trial suggest that immunogenicity was not associated with efficacy and safety of SB11 and RBZ in participants with nAMD. With a low overall ADA incidence, no clear association was identified between overall ADA positivity and pharmacokinetics. These findings support the biosimilarity of SB11 and RBZ, with no safety concern identified for SB11 vs RBZ associated with immunogenicity.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03150589.

Biosimilar versus InnovAtor MoLecule of RAnibizumab in Neovascular Age-Related MaCular DEgeneration (The BALANCE Trial): Real-World Evidence

Purpose

To analyse outcomes of innovator ranibizumab (IRM) (Lucentis) and biosimilar ranibizumab (BRM) (Razumab) in Indian eyes with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD).

Methods

Retrospective observational study in nAMD patients, who were treated with IRM or BRM (3 loading doses followed by pro re nata (PRN). Primary outcome measures were change in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and central macular thickness (CMT) along with safety analysis. Secondary outcomes measures were changes in the subretinal fluid (SRF) and intraretinal fluid (IRF).

Results

Inclusion criteria were satisfied in 164 eyes (60.74%). A total of 87 eyes were treated with IRM, and 77 eyes received BRM. Baseline BCVA was 0.57±0.27 logMAR in IRM group and 0.61±0.25 in the BRM group. At 3, 6, 9, and 12 months BCVA was 0.27±0.22 (p<0.0001), 0.34±0.23 (p<0.0001), 0.39±0.25 (p<0.0001), and 12 months 0.41±0.23 (p<0.0001) in the IRM group and 0.24±0.16 (p<0.0001), 0.27±0.16 (p<0.0001), 0.34±0.17 (p<0.0001), 0.38±0.18 (p<0.0001) in the BRM group. Baseline CMT was 420.39±54.45 μm in IRM group and 407.82±53.07 μm in BRM group. At 3, 6, 9, and 12 months, CMT decreased to 258.28±20.4 μm (p<0.0001), 268.38±19.5 μm (p<0.0001), 269.51±32.41 μm (p<0.0001), and 278.28±16.56 μm (p<0.0001) in the IRM group and 258.84±17.47 μm (p<0.0001), 265.69±17.29 μm (p<0.0001), 273.64±23.13 μm (p<0.0001), and 283.09±19.66 μm (p<0.0001) in the BRM group. Similar improvements in IRF and SRF levels in the patients were noted in both groups. Required number of doses of IRM and BRM was similar over the 12 month period in both groups. A similar profile of adverse events was noted in both the groups.

Conclusion

Intravitreal injection of IRM and BRM show similar efficacy and safety in Indian eyes with nAMD.

Bevacizumab for blinding eye disease &#x2013; is it time for the PBS to list for off-label use?

Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor eye injections have become the most accepted and effective treatment for some of the leading causes of blindness. Aflibercept (Eylea; Bayer) is the most expensive item on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, (PBS) with ranibizumab (Lucentis; Roche/Novartis) ranked eighth. In 2011 the pharmaceutical cost for these treatments was A$237 million - now the figure is A$665 million and climbing. Bevacizumab (Avastin; Roche) is part of the original molecular lineage for a group of biologic agents, which were originally designed for cancer therapy. It is now administered worldwide on an off-label basis and in very large numbers for retinal vascular disease. It has a proven efficacy and safety profile. Bevacizumab is thirty times cheaper than the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA)-approved alternatives and its use could reduce PBS costs by hundreds of millions of dollars. Should the TGA be the sole arbiter in the approval of drugs, or should alternative bodies have some say in the approval of off-label usage under such compelling circumstances? Legislation for this approach has been approved in France, the UK, and Italy. Only by eliminating the legal risk to authorising bodies and physicians, and the financial disincentive to the patient associated with off-label use, will drugs such as bevacizumab be more widely adopted.

An Introduction to Biosimilars for the Treatment of Retinal Diseases: A Narrative Review

Biological therapies have revolutionized the treatment of disease across a number of therapeutic areas including retinal diseases. However, on occasion, such treatments may be relatively more expensive compared to small molecule therapies. This can restrict patient access and treatment length leading to suboptimal clinical outcomes. Several biosimilar candidates of ranibizumab and aflibercept are currently in development and the first biosimilar of ranibizumab received EMA approval in August and FDA approval in September 2021. Biosimilars are biological medicines that are highly similar to an already-approved biological medicine (reference product). The physicochemical and clinical similarity of a biosimilar is determined by a rigorous analytical and clinical program, including extensive pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analysis with phase III equivalence studies where appropriate. These phase III studies are carried out in a patient population that is representative of all of the potential approved therapeutic indications of the originator product and the most sensitive for detecting potential differences between the biosimilar and the reference product. Biosimilars have been used successfully across a wide range of therapeutic areas for the past 15 years where they have achieved substantial cost savings that can be reinvested into healthcare systems without affecting the quality of patient care. The current review provides an introduction to biosimilars with the aim of preparing retinal specialists for discussing these products with their patients.

Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration (nAMD): A Review of Emerging Treatment Options

Neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) is a common world-wide cause of visual loss. Intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents are an effective means to treat nAMD and reduce its impact on vision compared to either sham treatment or photodynamic therapy. Currently, the approved anti-VEGF drugs include ranibizumab, aflibercept and brolucizumab. In addition, bevacizumab, used as an off-label drug, and has been shown to be effective in treating nAMD. While anti-VEGF agents are effective, its limitations include the requirement for frequent, often monthly injections, and the need for long-term treatment of nAMD. These present significant burdens on the healthcare system and on the patients. In addition, reviews of patients with nAMD treated with anti-VEGF have reported deterioration of vision over time with progression of geographic atrophy. These limitations are partly addressed by exploring different treatment regimens that reduce the frequency of treatments. Newer anti-VEGF drugs have been shown in Phase III clinical trials to have injection intervals as long as 12 or even 16 weeks for a proportion of patients. There is research on newer drugs that affect other pathways, such as the angiopoietin pathway, which may impact nAMD by extending the treatment interval and reducing the burden of treatment. Other measures include the use of sustained-release implants that release the drug regularly over a period of time, and can be refilled periodically, as well as hydrogel platforms that serve to release the drug. The use of biosimilars will also serve to reduce the cost of treatment for nAMD. A new frontier of gene therapy, primarily targeting genes involved in the transduction of retinal cells to produce anti-VEGF proteins intraocularly, also opens a new avenue of therapeutic approaches that can be used for treatment. This review paper will discuss both current treatment options and the newer treatments under development.