Clinical Evaluation of Humira® Biosimilar ONS-3010 in Healthy Volunteers: Focus on Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics

The totality of evidence approach in the development of AVT02 (adalimumab), a biosimilar to Humira

The development of a biosimilar is based on comparative structural, physicochemical, functional and clinical assessments. The sum of these analyses encompasses the 'totality of evidence', which demonstrates no clinically meaningful differences between the biosimilar and the reference product (RP). Once biosimilarity has been established, provided there is suitable scientific justification, clinical data may be extrapolated to other indications of the RP. AVT02 has been developed as a biosimilar to high-concentration, low-volume Humira (adalimumab), an anti-tumour necrosis factor-alpha monoclonal antibody approved for various chronic inflammatory indications. The totality of evidence for AVT02 is described, supporting its approval as an adalimumab biosimilar for all approved indications globally. Analytical similarity assessments using mass spectrometry methods demonstrated identical amino acid sequences for AVT02 and the RP, with high similarity in terms of primary structure, post-translational modifications and higher-order structural attributes. The mechanism of action was assessed by various cell-based potency assays and binding assays, and the results demonstrated that AVT02 is highly similar to the RP. No clinically meaningful differences in terms of purity, potency and safety were observed, and minor differences in a few physiochemical attributes did not impact the in vitro biologic activity and were not considered clinically relevant. Clinical similarity was demonstrated by comparing the pharmacokinetic, efficacy, safety and immunogenicity profiles of AVT02 with those of the RP. Clinical studies supported similar pharmacokinetic and comparable immunogenicity profiles between AVT02 and the RP in healthy participants and participants with moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis, with no new safety signals detected. The totality of evidence described demonstrates the biosimilarity of AVT02 to the RP, thereby fulfilling the scientific and regulatory requirements for AVT02 as a high-concentration biosimilar for the treatment of chronic plaque psoriasis and all approved indications of the RP.

CC-99677, a novel, oral, selective covalent MK2 inhibitor, sustainably reduces pro-inflammatory cytokine production

BACKGROUND

Mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK)-activated protein kinase-2 (MK2) is activated downstream of p38 MAPK and regulates stability of mRNAs encoding inflammatory cytokines. CC-99677 is a novel, irreversible, covalent MK2 inhibitor under development for the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and other inflammatory diseases. As part of a phase I clinical trial to assess safety and tolerability, we evaluated target engagement, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of CC-99677.

METHODS

The MK2 inhibitor CC-99677 was evaluated for its effect on cytokine expression in vitro in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) from healthy donors and patients with a definitive AS diagnosis. A novel in vitro model was developed to compare the potential for tachyphylaxis of CC-99677 and p38 inhibitors in THP-1 cells. The effect of CC-99677 on tristetraprolin (TTP) and cytokine mRNA was assessed in stimulated human monocyte-derived macrophages. In a first-in-human study, thirty-seven healthy volunteers were randomly assigned to daily oral doses of CC-99677 or placebo, and blood was collected at pre-specified time points before and after dosing. CC-99677 concentrations were assessed in the plasma, and CC-99677 binding to MK2 was evaluated in PBMCs. Ex vivo stimulation of the whole blood was conducted from participants in the first-in-human study to assess the pharmacodynamic effects.

RESULTS

In vitro, CC-99677 inhibited tumor necrosis factor (TNF), interleukin (IL)-6, and IL-17 protein production in samples of monocytes and macrophages from AS patients and healthy volunteers via an mRNA-destabilization mechanism. In the in vitro model of tachyphylaxis, CC-99677 showed a differentiated pattern of sustained TNF protein inhibition compared with p38 inhibitors. CC-99677 reduced TTP phosphorylation and accelerated the decay of inflammatory cytokine mRNA in lipopolysaccharide-stimulated macrophages. Administration of CC-99677 to healthy volunteers was safe and well-tolerated, with linear pharmacokinetics and sustained reduction of ex vivo whole blood TNF, IL-6, and chemokine synthesis.

CONCLUSIONS

CC-99677 inhibition of MK2 is a promising approach for the treatment of inflammatory diseases and may overcome the limitations of p38 MAPK inhibition.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03554993 .

Characterizing the kinetics of presepsin and associated inflammatory biomarkers in human endotoxemia

In this study, we describe the kinetics of a new potential inflammatory biomarker, presepsin, together with a panel of well-established biomarkers in a human endotoxemia study. We evaluated biomarker correlations and identified combinations that could hold valuable insights regarding the state of infection.

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

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

Comprehensive evaluation of microneedle-based intradermal adalimumab delivery vs. subcutaneous administration: results of a randomized controlled clinical trial

AIMS

To evaluate feasibility of intradermal (i.d.) adalimumab administration using hollow microneedles, and to compare a single i.d. dose of adalimumab using a hollow microneedle with a single subcutaneous (s.c.) dose using a conventional needle.

METHODS

In this single-centre double-blind, placebo-controlled, double-dummy clinical trial in 24 healthy adults we compared 40 mg adalimumab (0.4 mL) administered i.d. using a hollow microneedle with a s.c. dose using a conventional needle. Primary parameters were pain, acceptability and local tolerability; secondary parameters safety, pharmacokinetics and immunogenicity. We explored usability of optical coherence tomography, clinical photography, thermal imaging, and laser speckle contrast imaging to evaluate skin reaction after i.d. injections. In vitro protein analysis was performed to assess compatibility of adalimumab with the hollow microneedle device.

RESULTS

While feasible and safe, injection pain of i.d. adalimumab was higher compared to s.c. adalimumab (35.4 vs. 7.9 on a 100-point visual analogue scale). Initial absorption rate and relative bioavailability were higher after i.d. adalimumab (time to maximum plasma concentration = 95 h [47-120]; Frel = 129% [6.46%]) compared to s.c. adalimumab (time to maximum plasma concentration = 120 h [96-221]). Anti-adalimumab antibodies were detected in 50% and 83% of the subjects after i.d. and s.c. adalimumab, respectively. We observed statistically significantly more erythema and skin perfusion after i.d. adalimumab, compared to s.c. adalimumab and placebo injections (P < .0001). Cytokine secretion after whole blood lipopolysaccharide challenge was comparable between administration routes.

CONCLUSIONS

Intradermal injection of adalimumab using hollowing microneedles was perceived as more painful and less accepted than s.c. administration, but yields a higher relative bioavailability with similar safety and pharmacodynamic effects.

Pharmacokinetic equivalence of CT-P17 to high-concentration (100 mg/ml) reference adalimumab: A randomized phase I study in healthy subjects

This study aimed to demonstrate pharmacokinetic (PK) equivalence of a single dose of the proposed adalimumab biosimilar CT-P17 to United States-licensed adalimumab (US-adalimumab) and European Union-approved adalimumab (EU-adalimumab). This double-blind, parallel-group, phase I trial (clinicaltrials.gov NCT03970824) was conducted at 10 hospitals (Republic of Korea), in which healthy subjects (1:1:1) were randomized to receive a single 40 mg (100 mg/ml) subcutaneous injection of CT-P17, US-adalimumab, or EU-adalimumab. Primary end points were PK equivalence in terms of: area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity (AUC0-inf ); AUC from time zero to the last quantifiable concentration (AUC0-last ); and maximum serum concentration (Cmax ). PK equivalence was concluded if 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for percent ratios of geometric least squares means (GLSMs) for pairwise comparisons were within the equivalence margin of 80-125%. Additional PK end points, safety, and immunogenicity were evaluated. Of the 312 subjects who were randomized (103 CT-P17; 103 US-adalimumab; 106 EU-adalimumab), 308 subjects received study drug. AUC0-inf , AUC0-last , and Cmax were equivalent among CT-P17, US-adalimumab, and EU-adalimumab, because 90% CIs for the ratios of GLSMs were within the 80-125% equivalence margin for each pairwise comparison. Secondary PK end points, safety, and immunogenicity were similar between treatment groups. In conclusion, PK equivalence for single-dose administration of CT-P17, EU-adalimumab, and US-adalimumab was demonstrated in healthy adults. Safety and immunogenicity profiles were comparable between treatment groups and consistent with previous reports for adalimumab biosimilars.

First-in-human, randomized dose-escalation study of the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and immunogenicity of PF-06480605 in healthy subjects

AIMS

Human genetic, tissue expression, proteomics, transcriptomics and nonclinical studies implicate tumour necrosis factor α-like ligand 1A (TL1A) as a novel target in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). PF-06480605, a fully human immunoglobulin G1 monoclonal antibody, targets TL1A. This first-in-human, Phase 1, dose-escalation study assessed safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and immunogenicity of intravenous (IV) and subcutaneous (SC) PF-06480605 in healthy subjects (NCT01989143).

METHODS

Ninety-two subjects were randomized to single ascending doses (SAD), PF-06480605 1 mg, 3 mg, 10 mg, 30 mg, 100 mg, 300 mg, 600 mg or 800 mg IV, or multiple ascending doses (MAD), PF-06480605 3 × 500 mg IV, or 3 × 30 mg, 3 × 100 mg, or 3 × 300 mg SC every 2 weeks for three doses, or placebo. Safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, immunogenicity profiles and total TL1A, anti-drug antibody (ADA) and neutralizing antibody (NAb) levels were assessed at pre-determined times.

RESULTS

PF-06480605 SAD up to 800 mg IV and MAD up to 300 mg ×3 SC and 500 mg ×3 IV were well tolerated. Overall, there were 45 and 44 treatment-emergent adverse events in SAD and MAD cohorts, respectively, and no deaths or serious adverse events. PF-06480605 exposure generally increased dose-dependently. ADA and NAb levels did not impact safety, pharmacokinetics, or pharmacodynamics at higher doses. Target engagement was demonstrated through dose-dependent differences in serum total soluble TL1A concentrations for PF-06480605 vs placebo cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

PF-06480605 was generally well tolerated, and binding of soluble TL1A was maintained throughout the dose interval, supporting further study of PF-06480605 in patients with IBD and other inflammatory conditions.

Analysis of Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Parameters in EU- Versus US-Licensed Reference Biological Products: Are In Vivo Bridging Studies Justified for Biosimilar Development?

BACKGROUND

Bridging studies are mandatory in the EU and USA if the reference biological product used in the biosimilar comparability exercise is foreign sourced. However, it has been argued that the duplication of bridging studies may limit biosimilar development.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to explore whether it is necessary to conduct pharmacokinetic (PK)/pharmacodynamic (PD) bridging studies for biosimilars. This study examines similarities and differences between EU- and US-licensed reference biological products, based on literature-reported PK and/or PD data.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Drugs@FDA, and European Medicines Agency (EMA) databases to identify biosimilar bridging studies designed to evaluate similarities between EU- and US-licensed reference biological products. PK and/or PD parameters were retrieved; the ratio of the parameter value of the EU-licensed product to that of the US-licensed product and its corresponding 90% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Similarity was declared if the 90% CIs for the ratios of the PK or PD parameters were within the range of 80-125%.

RESULTS

Thirty-one bridging studies were identified for 11 biosimilars, including adalimumab (n = 10), bevacizumab (n = 4), epoetin alfa (n = 1), etanercept (n = 2), filgrastim (n = 1), infliximab (n = 3), insulin glargine (n = 1), insulin lispro (n = 1), PEGfilgrastim (n = 2), rituximab (n = 2), and trastuzumab (n = 4). Most studies showed PK and/or PD similarities between the EU- and US-licensed reference biological products. However, among the 31 studies, only three studies (accounting for two biologics, PEGfilgrastim and adalimumab) showed dissimilarity between the EU and US reference products. Although one bridging study on PEGfilgrastim (Sandoz) indicated dissimilar PKs (maximum observed plasma concentration [C_max] and area under the concentration-time curve [AUC]) between the reference products, the other study (Mylan) demonstrated similar PK. Moreover, two of ten studies involving adalimumab failed to demonstrate similarities between the reference products. However, for both cases, PK similarities were later confirmed in the follow-up bridging studies with larger sample sizes.

CONCLUSION

Our analysis reveals that, in most cases, the reference biological products originated from the EU and those from the USA are almost indistinguishable in terms of PK/PD properties. Additional in vivo bridging studies between reference products from different global regions may not be required if similar physicochemical and structural properties are evident in vitro.

Biosimilars in Dermatology - theory becomes reality

Biosimilars are biological medicines that are analogues of a specific reference product. Biosimilars of the tumor necrosis factor alpha inhibitors infliximab and etanercept are already approved and available for dermatological indications. Regulatory agencies require in-depth analysis of physicochemical and functional properties of these highly complex molecules as well as clinical data on their similarity regarding efficacy and safety in at least one clinical trial in a sensitive and homogeneous population. Thus, it must be shown that biosimilars are essentially the same as the originator product if they are to be licensed in regulated drug markets. As a consequence, these data are extrapolated from one molecule (the originator) to another (biosimilar) resulting in an approval that includes the same indications as the originator product. While extrapolation is well accepted and regulated, clear recommendations regarding the interchangeability of originators and biosimilars as well as data on multiple consecutive switching are missing. Current scientific knowledge does not argue against the use of biosimilars for dermatological indications, but sequential switching of biosimilars should be considered carefully. To increase confidence and enhance evidence for biosimilars, accurate documentation of the specific products given to each patient is essential and should preferably be included in patient registries.