The scientific and regulatory rationale for indication extrapolation: a case study based on the infliximab biosimilar CT-P13

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.

Practical Guidance on Biosimilars, With a Focus on Latin America: What Do Rheumatologists Need to Know?

BACKGROUND/HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE

Availability of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) has improved clinical outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis, but it also increased the cost of treatment. Biosimilars, the regulated copies of biologic products, have a potential to reduce health care costs and expand access to treatment. However, because of a complex development process, biosimilars can be considered only those noninnovator biologics with satisfactory supporting evidence (ranging from structural to clinical), as outlined in the recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO). In Latin America, a heterogeneous regulatory landscape and nonconsistent approval practices for biosimilars create decision-making challenges for practicing rheumatologists.

SUMMARY OF LITERATURE

Most Latin American countries either have adopted or are in the process of adopting guidelines for the approval of biosimilars. However, among several marketed bDMARDs in the region, currently there are only 2 products that could be considered true biosimilars, based on the WHO criteria. The rest can be considered only intended copies, whose safety and efficacy are not fully established. One such product had to be withdrawn from the market because of safety concerns.

CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS

Practicing rheumatologists in Latin America need to understand the regulatory situation for biosimilars in their countries. When considering bDMARDs that are not innovator products, clinicians should use only those that have been approved according to the WHO recommendations. For clarification, local health authorities or professional associations should be contacted.

Comparing safety information of biosimilars with their originators: a cross-sectional analysis of European risk management plans

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Biosimilars have been available in the European Union (EU) since 2006. However, their uptake in routine care is heterogeneous across countries. The aim of the present study was to compare the safety information of biosimilars and their originators based on the information in the European risk management plan (RMP).

METHODS

A cross-sectional analysis on publicly available regulatory documents (RMPs and Summaries of Product Characteristics) of biosimilars and corresponding originators up to 1 November 2015 was performed. The safety concerns were extracted and merged into general safety concerns, and clinical relevance was assessed. The frequency of safety concerns and the representation of these safety concerns per general safety concern were assessed by either comparing RMPs of biosimilars and originators (if available for both) or comparing RMPs with the Summary of Product Characteristics of the originator.

RESULTS

Nineteen biosimilars and six originators were included. Overall, 55 general safety concerns (12 low, 21 medium and 22 highly clinically relevant) were identified. For all active substances, except for infliximab, no or only one difference was found in the listed general safety concerns. Comparison of regulatory documents for infliximab identified three medium clinically relevant general safety concerns more for infliximab biosimilars and two general safety concerns more for its originator.

CONCLUSION

Based on publicly available information filed for regulatory purposes, no substantial differences were observed in the reporting of safety information for biosimilars and related originators. A direct comparison between biosimilars and related originators through formal postmarketing studies is needed to evaluate specific safety issues emerging during the products' life cycle.

The totality-of-the-evidence approach to the development and assessment of GP2015, a proposed etanercept biosimilar

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this review is to describe the inherent variability that is natural to biologics and, using the proposed etanercept biosimilar (GP2015) as an example, provide details on the "totality-of-the-evidence" concept, whereby all physicochemical, biologic, preclinical, and clinical data for a biosimilar and reference medicine are evaluated in an iterative, stepwise manner and shown to be highly similar.

METHODS

This review was carried out by a search of published articles, reviews, abstracts and patents in PubMed/Medline and Google Scholar up to November 2016.

RESULTS

Analytical, functional, preclinical, and clinical data provide a comprehensive understanding of both GP2015 and reference etanercept, and demonstrate a high level of similarity between the two products in accordance with regulatory requirements. The totality of the evidence from all analyses and performed trials provides a robust scientific bridge between the biosimilar and clinical experience with the reference medicine, and is used to justify the use of the biosimilar in all indications for which the reference medicine is approved.

CONCLUSION

Biologic therapies have revolutionized the treatment of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. The availability of biosimilars has the potential to improve patient access to biologic medicines and stimulate innovation. Physicians may be unfamiliar with the totality-of-the-evidence concept; therefore education and information on this unique approach to developing biosimilars is required to facilitate the use of biosimilars in clinical practice and allow physicians to make informed treatment decisions.

The Rituximab Biosimilar CT-P10 in Rheumatology and Cancer: A Budget Impact Analysis in 28 European Countries

Introduction

New biosimilars of monoclonal antibodies are anticipated to bring significant cost savings and increase access to treatment. The rituximab biosimilar CT-P10 has recently been approved in Europe in all indications held by reference rituximab (RTX), including rheumatoid arthritis, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, and chronic lymphocytic leukemia. We analyzed the budgetary impact of the introduction of CT-P10 into the European Union (EU) for use in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and cancer diagnoses, using a budget impact analysis model.

Methods

The model used a base case scenario in which the 1-year uptake of CT-P10 was estimated at 30%, and the cost of CT-P10 was assumed to be 70% of the cost of RTX. A second 1-year scenario was also modeled, in which the market share of CT-P10 was assumed to be 50% (scenario 2). Finally, 3-year time horizon outcomes were calculated, in which the market share of CT-P10 was assumed to be 30%, 40%, and 50% in the first, second, and third years, respectively.

Results

In the base case scenario, the introduction of CT-P10 was associated with projected savings of €90.04 million in the first year, which would allow 7531 additional patients to access rituximab treatment. This was equivalent to a 6.4% increase in the number of rituximab-treated patients. In scenario 2, budget savings were €150.10 million, with a total of 12,551 additional patients able to access rituximab, equivalent to a 10.7% increase. Over a 3-year time horizon, projected budget savings were approximately €570 million, equating to 47,695 additional patients able to access rituximab.

Conclusions

The model predicted that the introduction of CT-P10 in the EU will be associated with significant budget savings, the reallocation of which will enable many more patients to access rituximab treatment. This is likely to have a significant impact on health gains at patient and societal levels.

Funding: CELLTRION Healthcare Co., Ltd. sponsored the development and analysis of the budget impact analysis model.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s12325-017-0522-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Extrapolation and Interchangeability of Infliximab and Adalimumab in Inflammatory Bowel Disease

OPINION STATEMENT

Infliximab and adalimumab biosimilars have been approved by the FDA and European Medicines Agency and have already been introduced to the international market. Availability into the US market is imminent. Biosimilars are highly similar to the reference biologic product but should not be referred to as, nor equated with, generic medications as no two biosimilars can ever be identical. Regulatory pathways for biosimilar approval consider the totality of evidence for biosimilar approvals, but the preponderance of development relies on analytic and functional testing and allows extrapolation between indications to reduce the financial burden of completing comparative clinical trials for each indication. Neither CT-P13 (infliximab biosimilar) nor ABP 501 (adalimumab biosimilar) was clinically tested in patients with inflammatory bowel disease prior to being submitted for approval by regulatory agencies. The body of available evidence suggests that these drugs will perform similarly to their originators. The pathway for interchangeability of biosimilars has yet to be clarified by federal regulators and currently remains determined by states within the USA. However, preliminary data suggests that switching from originator to biosimilar is safe with minimal differences in clinical efficacy.

The safety of emerging biosimilar drugs for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis

INTRODUCTION

Biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs), often administered in combination with methotrexate, target specific inflammatory mediators and have transformed the treatment of rheumatic diseases, especially rheumatoid arthritis (RA) but also the spondyloarthritides. However, the high cost of these drugs in many countries restricts patient access. As many bDMARDs have reached or are near to patent expiration, numerous biosimilar drugs are in development and some have already been approved. Biosimilars are generally priced lower than their reference products (RPs), or bio-originators, and as prices come down it is hoped that patient access to these drugs will increase, making the safety of these drugs an area of major interest. Areas covered: This article reviews publicly available safety data on biosimilars in RA. Expert opinion: Most available data for biosimilars in RA relate to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) and rituximab (an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody). As biosimilar use around the world increases, evidence supporting the clinical safety of the biosimilars compared with their RPs also grows. To date, no new safety concerns have been raised in studies with TNFi or rituximab biosimilars for the treatment of RA; safety profiles have been consistent with those of their RPs. However, careful post-marketing pharmacovigilance remains necessary.

Effectiveness and Safety of CT-P13 (Biosimilar Infliximab) in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease in Real Life at 6 Months

BACKGROUND

CT-P13 is a biosimilar of Remicade^®, an agent approved in some countries for use in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Controlled clinical trials have demonstrated the efficacy and safety of CT-P13 in rheumatic diseases, but not in IBD.

AIMS

To assess the effectiveness and safety of CT-P13 in IBD patients in real clinical practice.

METHODS

This is a prospective observational study in patients with moderate to severe Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis treated with CT-P13. The study was performed in one single center. Patients included were naive or switched to anti-TNF treatment from the reference infliximab (Remicade^®) to CT-P13. Efficacy and safety were assessed in naive and switched patients who were in remission at the time of the switch at months 3 and 6 of therapy.

RESULTS

87.5 and 83.9% of switched CD patients who were in remission at the time of the switch continued in remission, and 66.7 and 50% of naive CD patients reached remission, at months 3 and 6. In UC switched cases, 92 and 91.3% of patients in remission at the time of the switch continued in remission, at 3 and 6 months. In naive UC patients, the remission rates were 44.4 and 66.7%, at months 3 and 6. Adverse events occurred in 7.5% of patients during 6 months of study.

CONCLUSIONS

CT-P13 was efficacious and well tolerated in patients with CD or UC.

Biosimilars in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Facts and Fears of Extrapolation

Biologic drugs such as infliximab and other anti-tumor necrosis factor monoclonal antibodies have transformed the treatment of immune-mediated inflammatory conditions such as Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis (collectively known as inflammatory bowel disease [IBD]). However, the complex manufacturing processes involved in producing these drugs mean their use in clinical practice is expensive. Recent or impending expiration of patents for several biologics has led to development of biosimilar versions of these drugs, with the aim of providing substantial cost savings and increased accessibility to treatment. Biosimilars undergo an expedited regulatory process. This involves proving structural, functional, and biological biosimilarity to the reference product (RP). It is also expected that clinical equivalency/comparability will be demonstrated in a clinical trial in one (or more) sensitive population. Once these requirements are fulfilled, extrapolation of biosimilar approval to other indications for which the RP is approved is permitted without the need for further clinical trials, as long as this is scientifically justifiable. However, such justification requires that the mechanism(s) of action of the RP in question should be similar across indications and also comparable between the RP and the biosimilar in the clinically tested population(s). Likewise, the pharmacokinetics, immunogenicity, and safety of the RP should be similar across indications and comparable between the RP and biosimilar in the clinically tested population(s). To date, most anti-tumor necrosis factor biosimilars have been tested in trials recruiting patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Concerns have been raised regarding extrapolation of clinical data obtained in rheumatologic populations to IBD indications. In this review, we discuss the issues surrounding indication extrapolation, with a focus on extrapolation to IBD.

Anti TNF-α therapy for ulcerative colitis: current status and prospects for the future

INTRODUCTION

Anti TNF-α agents have become a significant advance in the management of ulcerative colitis, proving to induce, with rapid onset, clinical and endoscopic remission. However, there is still a considerable unmet medical need in ulcerative colitis. Areas covered: The aim of this review was to summarize the patterns of use and the effectiveness of anti TNF-α in ulcerative colitis, highlighting their current position in treatment algorithms. Moreover, we set out a five-year view hypothesizing different treatment strategies. Expert commentary: The rapid onset of action and the effectiveness in inducing mucosal healing are the most important pros of anti TNF-α, supporting present and future use. Conversely, the relevant risk of loss of response and the safety profile have raised several concerns. In the future, the advent of different molecular targeting therapies can improve the management of UC patients, evolving to individually tailored strategies.

Clinical trials for authorized biosimilars in the European Union: a systematic review

Aim

In 2006, Omnitrope (by Sandoz) was the first approved biosimilar in Europe. To date, 21 biosimilars for seven different biologics are on the market. The present study compared the clinical trials undertaken to obtain market authorization.

Methods

We summarized the findings of a comprehensive review of all clinical trials up to market authorization of approved biosimilars, using the European public assessment reports (EPARs) published by the European Medicines Agency (EMA). The features compared were, among others, the number of patients enrolled, the number of trials, the types of trial design, choice of endpoints and equivalence margins for pharmacokinetic (PK)/pharmacodynamic (PD) and phase III trials.

Results

The variability between the clinical development strategies is high. Some differences are explainable by the characteristics of the product; if, for example, the PD marker can be assumed to predict the clinical outcome, no efficacy trials might be necessary. However, even for products with the same reference product, the sample size, endpoints and statistical models are not always the same.

Conclusions

There seems to be flexibility for sponsors regarding the decision as to how best to prove biosimilarity.

Clinical experience with infliximab biosimilar Remsima (CT-P13) in inflammatory bowel disease patients

Many reference biological therapies have now reached or are near to patent expiry, and therefore a number of biosimilars have been or will be developed. The term biosimilar can be defined as a biotherapeutic product that is similar in efficacy, safety and quality to the licensed reference product. Biosimilars may lead to a reduced price and significant cost savings for the health community and hopefully more patients globally will have easier access to biological therapy when indicated. CT-P13, which is a TNF-alfa inhibitor, is the first monoclonal antibody biosimilar being used in clinical practice. The drug is approved for all indications as an innovator product although clinical efficacy has only been demonstrated in rheumatic diseases. Until now the number of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) treated with CT-P13 is confined, but experience is continuously growing. Based on current data, CT-P13 seems to be efficacious and generally well tolerated in IBD especially in patients who are naïve to biological therapy. Knowledge with regard to interchangeability between CT-P13 and the originator infliximab is however, still rather sparse and more data are desired. Immunogenicity and long-term safety related to CT-P13 are other areas of great importance and good and reliable postmarketing pharmacovigilance is therefore required in the coming years.