Biosimilar Retacrit® (epoetin zeta) in the treatment of chemotherapy-induced symptomatic anemia in hematology and oncology in Germany (ORHEO) - non-interventional study

Oncology biosimilars: New developments and future directions

Biologicals have become an integral part of cancer treatment both as therapeutic agents and as supportive care agents. It is important to know that biologics are large, complex molecular entities requiring extensive immunogenicity testing and pharmacovigilance strategies to ensure no immune response is evoked in the body. Oncology's pharmacological market is dominated by biologics; however, their high development and manufacturing costs are burdensome to health care systems. Biologics being the most expensive prescription drugs on the market limit the accessibility for necessary treatment in the case of many patients. As biologics patents expire, the development of biosimilars is underway in an effort to lower costs and enable patients to access new cancer therapies. Regulatory guidelines for biosimilars have now been established and are constantly being revised to address any issues, facilitating their robust development. Moreover, many scientific societies offer guidance to help stakeholders better understand current regulations and biosimilar's safety. Despite the potential cost benefits, lack of knowledge about biosimilars, and the possibility of immunogenicity have created an uncertain environment for healthcare professionals and patients. In this review, we provide an overview of relevant legislation and regulations, pharmacoeconomics, and stakeholder perceptions regarding biosimilars. The article also describes biosimilars in development, as well as the ones currently available on the market.

How I treat cancer-associated anemia

Despite increasing use of targeted therapies to treat cancer, anemia remains a common complication of cancer therapy. Physician concerns about the safety of intravenous (IV) iron products and erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) have resulted in many patients with cancer receiving no or suboptimal anemia therapy. In this article, we present 4 patient cases that illustrate both common and complex clinical scenarios. We first present a review of erythropoiesis and then describe our approach to cancer-associated anemia by identifying the contributing causes before selecting specific treatments. We summarize clinical trial data affirming the safety and efficacy of currently available IV iron products used to treat cancer-associated anemia and illustrate how we use commonly available laboratory tests to assess iron status during routine patient management. We compare adverse event rates associated with IV iron vs red cell transfusion and discuss using first-line IV iron monotherapy to treat anemic patients with cancer, which decreases the need for ESAs. A possible mechanism behind ESA-induced tumor progression is discussed. Finally, we review the potential of novel therapies such as ascorbic acid, prolyl hydroxylase inhibitors, activin traps, hepcidin, and bone morphogenetic protein antagonists in treating cancer-associated anemia.

Use and costs of originator and biosimilar erythropoiesis-stimulating agents in the treatment of chemotherapy-induced anemia: real-world evidence from an Italian hospital

The aim of this retrospective study is to evaluate adherence, switch and costs a year after the start of treatment with different erythropoietin-stimulating agents. There were 277 patients, 200 were originators (72.20%) and 77 (27.80%) were biosimilars. Adherence to treatment for originators is 0.84 ± 0.22 versus 0.76 ± 0.27 for biosimilars (p = 0.3241). Medication adherence was calculated as ratio between received daily dose to prescribed daily dose. The optimum value is 1, values less than 1 indicate loss of adherence.  The cost of treatment per year is €7365 per patient for the use of the originator drug versus €2587 for biosimilars, with a difference of €4777 per patient.

Prognostic Significance of Blood Transfusion in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Patients without Autologous Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

The aim of this study was to evaluate whether blood transfusions affect overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) patients without hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. A total of 181 patients were enrolled and divided into two groups: 68 patients in the transfused group and 113 patients in the nontransfused group. Statistical analyses showed that there were significant differences in ECOG scoring, Ig isotype, platelet (Plt) counts, hemoglobin (Hb) level, serum creatinine (Scr) level, and β₂-microglobulin (β₂-MG) level between the two groups. Univariate analyses showed that higher International Staging System staging, Plt counts < 100 × 10⁹/L, Scr level ≥ 177 μmol/L, serum β₂-MG ≥ 5.5 μmol/L, serum calcium (Ca) ≥ 2.75 mmol/L, and thalidomide use were associated with both OS and PFS in MM patients. Age ≥ 60 was associated with OS and Ig isotype was associated with PFS in MM patients. Moreover, blood transfusion was associated with PFS but not OS in MM patients. Multivariate analyses showed that blood transfusion was not an independent factor for PFS in MM patients. Our preliminary results suggested that newly diagnosed MM patients may benefit from a liberal blood transfusion strategy, since blood transfusion is not an independent impact factor for survival.