Review of Adalimumab Biosimilar SB5 in Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases

SB5 is an approved biosimilar of adalimumab, a recombinant monoclonal anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antibody. The approval of SB5 was based on the comparison with reference adalimumab in analytical studies, pharmacokinetic (PK) and immunogenicity assessments, and randomized controlled trials. Efficacy data was primarily obtained in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, and extended to include additional indications such as psoriasis, Crohn's disease, or ulcerative colitis by extrapolation. Following its approval, additional post-marketing data have been collected comparing SB5 with reference adalimumab. This review summarizes the clinical data on SB5 from randomized controlled trials and provides a comprehensive overview of the available post-approval data. In "real-world" settings, SB5 was as effective as its reference product across different indications and countries, treatment persistence was well maintained throughout studies, and no new safety concerns were identified. In both controlled and "real-world" settings, switching from reference adalimumab to SB5 was not associated with altered efficacy or clinical complications. In post-approval studies, the quality of SB5 was consistent over time, independent of the batch and process changes, and the SB5 autoinjector was preferred over other autoinjectors by both healthcare professionals and patients. Taken together, these data support the use of SB5 whenever reference adalimumab is appropriate and demonstrate that switching from reference adalimumab to SB5 is feasible.

Efficacy and Safety of Switching from Adalimumab Originator to SB5, Adalimumab Biosimilar for Noninfectious Uveitis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of switching from adalimumab originator (Humira, AbbVie) to SB5, adalimumab biosimilar (Adalloce, Samsung Bioepis) in patients with noninfectious uveitis (NIU).

METHODS

Fifteen patients (29 eyes) with NIU who were switched from adalimumab originator to SB5 and followed up for 6 months or longer were retrospectively included. Data consisted of best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA, logMAR), intraocular pressure (IOP, mmHg), anterior chamber (AC) cell grade, anterior vitreous (AV) cell grade, vitreous haze grade, central macular thickness (CMT, μm), and macular volume (MV, mm3) at pre-switching, 2, 4, and 6 months post-switching.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in BCVA, AC and AV cell grades, and vitreous haze grades at 2, 4, and 6 months post- compared with pre-switching, and no significant differences in CMT and MV at 2 and 6 months post-switching. CMT and MV decreased from 260.55 ± 67.44 μm and 8.37 ± 1.14 mm3 at pre-switching to 244.14 ± 60.31 μm (p = 0.032) and 8.11 ± 1.20 mm3 (p = 0.027) at 4 months post-switching, respectively. There was no recurrence of uveitis, as defined by AC cell grade, vitreous haze, or BCVA. Four patients (27%) were switched back to adalimumab originator after a mean of 9 weeks, due to discomfort during the injection (three patients) and technical difficulty with the new injection device (one patient). No other adverse events occurred after switching to SB5.

CONCLUSION

Switching from adalimumab originator to SB5 for NIU does not result in clinically significant differences in treatment efficacy and safety.

Comparison of Performances of Adalimumab Biosimilars SB5, ABP501, GP2017, and MSB11022 in Treating Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: A Real-Life, Multicenter, Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Adalimumab (ADA) biosimilars have entered the therapeutic armamentarium of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), allowing for the treatment of a greater number of patients for their reduced cost than the originator. However, comparative data on the efficacy and safety of the various ADA biosimilars remains scarce.We compare the efficacy and safety of ADA biosimilars SB5, ABP501, GP2017, and MSB11022 in treating IBD outpatients in a real-life Italian setting.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on consecutive IBD outpatients with complete clinical, laboratory, and endoscopic data. Clinical activity was measured using the Mayo score in ulcerative colitis (UC) and the Harvey-Bradshaw Index in Crohn's disease (CD). The primary endpoints were the following: (1) induction of remission in patients new to biologics and patients new to ADA but previously exposed to other anti-tumor necrosis factor agents or other biologics; (2) maintenance of remission in patients switched from the ADA originator to an ADA biosimilar; and (3) safety of various biosimilars.

RESULTS

A total of 533 patients were enrolled according to the inclusion criteria: 162 patients with UC and 371 patients with CD. Clinical remission was obtained in 79.6% of patients new to biologics and 59.2% of patients new to ADA but not to other biologics; clinical remission was maintained in 81.0% of patients switched from the originator, and adverse events were recorded in 6.7% of patients. There was no significant difference between the 4 ADA biosimilars for each predetermined endpoint.

CONCLUSIONS

Adalimumab biosimilars are effective and safe in IBD treatment, both in new patients and in patients switched from the ADA originator. No difference in efficacy and safety was found between ADA biosimilars.

A Randomized Pharmacokinetic Study in Healthy Male Subjects Comparing a High-concentration, Citrate-free SB5 Formulation (40 mg/0.4 ml) and Prior SB5 (Adalimumab Biosimilar)

Introduction

SB5 is an approved biosimilar of adalimumab, a monoclonal anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) antibody. This study compared pharmacokinetics (PK), safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity between a new high-concentration, low-volume, and citrate-free formulation (40 mg/0.4 ml, SB5-HC) and the current low-concentration formulation with higher volume (40 mg/0.8 ml, SB5-LC) to evaluate the bioequivalence of the two formulations.

Methods

This study was a randomized, single-blind, two-arm, parallel-group, single-dose study in healthy male subjects. Subjects were randomized to receive either SB5-HC or SB5-LC via subcutaneous injection using a pre-filled syringe. Primary endpoints were the area under the curve of the concentration–time curve from zero to infinity (AUC_inf) and maximum serum concentration (C_max). Bioequivalence was achieved if the 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for the ratios of the geometric least squares mean (LSMean) of primary endpoints were within the pre-defined bioequivalence margins of 0.80–1.25. Secondary endpoints included safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity.

Results

Subjects (n = 188) were randomized to SB5-HC (n = 94) or SB5-LC (n = 94). Baseline characteristics were comparable between the two treatment groups. The mean values for AUC_inf and C_max were similar between the SB5-HC and SB5-LC groups. For the primary endpoints, the geometric LSMean ratios (90% CI) for AUC_inf and C_max were 0.920 (0.8262–1.0239) and 0.984 (0.9126–1.0604), respectively, placing the corresponding 90% CIs well within the pre-defined bioequivalence margin of 0.80–1.25. All treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were considered mild to moderate and were reported for 44.7% and 51.1% of subjects in the SB5-HC and SB5-LC groups, respectively. Immunogenicity assessed by frequency of occurrence of anti-drug antibodies (ADAs) and neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) was comparable between groups.

Conclusions

This bridging study demonstrated PK equivalence and comparable safety and tolerability of subcutaneous injection of SB5 via SB5-HC or SB5-LC.

Clinicaltrials.gov identifier

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04514796.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40744-022-00471-8.

Effectiveness and Safety of Nonmedical Switch From Adalimumab Originator to SB5 Biosimilar in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: Twelve-Month Follow-Up From the TABLET Registry

BACKGROUND

Few data are currently available about SB5 in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness and safety of SB5 in a cohort of patients with IBD in stable remission switched from the adalimumab (ADA) originator and in a cohort of patients with IBD naïve to ADA.

METHODS

We prospectively enrolled patients with IBD who started ADA treatment with SB5 (naïve cohort) and those who underwent a nonmedical switch from the ADA originator to SB5 (switching cohort). Clinical remission and safety were assessed at baseline and at 3, 6, and 12 months. In addition, in a small cohort of patients who were switched, we assessed the ADA serum trough levels and antidrug antibodies at baseline, 3, and 6 months.

RESULTS

In the naïve cohort, the overall remission rate at 12 months was 60.42%, whereas in the switching cohort it was 89.02%. Fifty-three (36.3%) patients experienced an adverse event, and injection site pain was the most common; it was significantly more frequent in the switching cohort (P = 0.001). No differences were found in terms of ADA serum trough levels at baseline, 3, and 6 months after switching. No patient developed antidrug antibodies after the switch.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that SB5 seemed effective and safe in IBD, both in the naïve cohort and in the switching cohort. Further studies are needed to confirm these data in terms of mucosal healing.

Current evidence on the use of the adalimumab biosimilar SB5 (ImraldiTM): a multidisciplinary perspective

INTRODUCTION

This review provides an overview of data from trials and real-world studies available for SB5 (Imraldi^TM) across three main therapeutic areas: rheumatology, gastroenterology, and dermatology.

AREAS COVERED

A literature search for publications on data for SB5 efficacy/effectiveness, safety, and immunogenicity was undertaken.

EXPERT OPINION

Evidence derived from clinical studies suggest that the biosimilar SB5 is a safe and effective alternative to reference adalimumab. Considering that patients suffering from immune-mediated inflammatory diseases such as inflammatory arthritis, inflammatory bowel disease and psoriasis often require long-term biologic treatment, biosimilar medicines (such as SB5) can reduce healthcare costs while increasing access to effective treatments.

Does Similarity Breed Contempt? A Review of the Use of Biosimilars in Inflammatory Bowel Disease

The introduction of therapeutic monoclonal antibodies directed against tumor necrosis factor-α has revolutionized the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) by improving quality of life, decreasing the frequency and length of hospital admissions, and reducing corticosteroid use. Nevertheless, biologics are very expensive, substantially contributing to the cost of care for patients with IBD. To reduce this cost and improve treatment access, biosimilars, which are therapeutic monoclonal antibodies (biologicals) similar to but not identical to the reference biologic, were introduced. Despite their potential benefits, the adoption and uptake of biosimilars have varied considerably across the USA and Europe. Here, we highlight the current biosimilar therapeutic landscape, discuss barriers to their use, and provide an overview of published studies evaluating the efficacy and safety of biosimilars in IBD.

A propensity score-weighted comparison between adalimumab originator and its biosimilars, ABP501 and SB5, in inflammatory bowel disease: a multicenter Italian study

BACKGROUND

Adalimumab is an effective and safe biological drug for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Nowadays, several biosimilar agents are available, but data regarding their efficacy and safety in patients with IBD are still lacking. We aimed to compare the effectiveness and tolerability between adalimumab originator, ABP501 and SB5 biosimilars in patients with IBD in the short term (after induction and after 6 months of treatment) through a propensity score-weighted multicenter cohort study.

METHODS

We included 156 patients with IBD, 69 patients with ulcerative colitis and 87 patients with Crohn's disease (CD) receiving ABP501 or SB5 biosimilars from January 2019 to April 2020 for moderate-to-severe disease. For comparison, a group of age- and sex-matched patients treated with adalimumab originator was used. We collected clinical and biochemical data after induction and at 6 months of treatment. Endoscopic data were recorded only at baseline.

RESULTS

Overall, clinical benefit was achieved by 86.4% and 85.3% after induction and at 6 months, respectively, without a statistically significant difference between the three treatment groups (p = 0.68 and p = 0.46). However, after induction, we found significant differences between the two types of the disease (ulcerative colitis or CD, p = 0.004), with a greater clinical benefit achieved by patients with CD. Also, the therapeutic optimization rate between the three drugs was not statistically significant different (p = 0.30). All treatments showed a good safety profile, with only 10 patients who needed to stop therapy because of adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Adalimumab biosimilars seem to be as effective and safe as the originator in patients with IBD. Surely, they represent a great opportunity to reduce the costs of biological therapies, however larger and longer real-life studies are necessary.

Clinical experience with adalimumab biosimilar imraldi in hidradenitis suppurativa

Adalimumab is the only biologic therapy approved for the treatment of patients with hidradenitis suppurativa, a chronic and disabling skin condition. To date, there are no studies in the literature about the effectiveness of adalimumab biosimilar SB5 in hidradenitis suppurativa. The aim of this study was to evaluate its efficacy and safety. A retrospective observational study was performed in hidradenitis suppurativa adalimumab naive patients and in patients who were switched from the adalimumab originator. Eleven patients were included in the study. Our results support adalimumab SB5 as an effective and well tolerated drug, with a good interchangeability with its originator also for the treatment of hidradenitis suppurativa.

Efficacy and safety of switching from reference adalimumab to SB5 in a real-life cohort of inflammatory rheumatic joint diseases

OBJECTIVE

SB5 showed comparable efficacy and safety profile in respect to adalimumab originator (ADA) in randomized clinical trials of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and psoriasis. We aimed to describe the efficacy and safety of SB5 after switching from ADA in RA, axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) patients.

METHOD

Adult RA, PsA, axSpA, JIA patients treated with ADA for at least 6 months, switched to SB5 in stable clinical conditions, were eligible. Data on safety, activity indexes and patient-reported outcomes were collected at baseline, 3 and 6 months after switching.

RESULTS

Eighty-two patients (19 RA, 28 PsA, 32 axSpA and 3 JIA; 45 females, mean age 54 ± 14 years, disease duration 13 ± 7 years, ADA duration 6 ± 3 years) were enrolled. RA patients showed stable conditions, while PsA patients showed an increase in both HAQ, DAS28(CRP) and DAPSA and axSpA patients an increase in VAS pain, VAS patient disease activity and ASDAS, both at 3 months. There were changes in the concomitant medications profile, with regression of activity indexes increases at 6 months. Adverse events were reported by 33.7% patients at 3 months and 16.6% patients at 6 months, mostly disease flares and infectious events. Two patients stopped SB5.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite temporary changes in the concomitant medication profile for mild disease flares, our real-life data replicate the safety profile of switching from ADA to SB5 in RA, with additional data for its applicability in PsA and axSpA patients, further supporting switching to biosimilars in treating inflammatory rheumatic conditions. Key Points • Switching from adalimumab originator to SB5 is feasible in real life rheumatic inflammatory joint diseases. • Mild disease flares can present after switching from originator adalimumab to SB5, in particular in axial spondyloarthritis and psoriatic arthritis. • Changes in concomitant medications profile allows the control of minor disease flares presenting after switching from adalimumab originator to SB5.

Usability and safety of SB5 (an adalimumab biosimilar) prefilled syringe and autoinjector in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To demonstrate comparability between administration of the adalimumab biosimilar, SB5, via prefilled syringe (PFS) and autoinjector (AI) pen based on injection site pain, patient preference, and safety in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients.

METHODS

In this phase 2, open-label study (NCT02565810; EudraCT Number 2014-004887-39), adult RA patients self-administered 40 mg SB5 subcutaneously via PFS at weeks 0 and 2, followed by AI at weeks 4, 6, 8, and 10. Patients rated injection site pain from 0 (no pain) to 10 (severe pain) using a visual numeric scale immediately and 15-30 min post-injection at weeks 0, 2, 4, and 6. Equivalence between PFS and AI was concluded if the 97.5% confidence interval (CI) of the difference in the injection site pain scores at weeks 2 and 6 was contained within the equivalence margin of ±5. Overall impression and preference for PFS and AI were also evaluated. Safety was assessed up to 20 weeks after the first injection.

RESULTS

Of 49 patients enrolled, 48 completed the study. Mean injection site pain scores were equivalent between PFS and AI immediately (2.3 vs 2.0; 97.5% CI = -0.99-0.30) and 15-30 min post-injection (0.8 vs 0.7; 97.5% CI = -0.47-0.25). The overall impression of both devices was comparable. The overall preference of AI was higher than PFS. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE) were mild-to-moderate. There were no severe or serious TEAEs reported during the study.

CONCLUSIONS

In RA patients, SB5 showed equivalent injection site pain and comparable safety when administered via PFS and AI.

Evaluation of Physicochemical and Biological Stability of 36-Months-Aged SB5 (Adalimumab Biosimilar) for 4 Weeks at Room Temperature

Introduction

Tumor necrosis factor (TNF-alpha) inhibitors, such as adalimumab, have shown success in treating autoimmune inflammatory diseases but are associated with substantial financial burdens to the healthcare system. Biosimilars, which are highly similar to biologic agents, offer the potential to reduce the financial burden of treatment. In the case of TNF-alpha inhibitors, they may also offer improved stability and enable prolonged use. SB5, an adalimumab biosimilar, has shown equivalent efficacy and comparable safety to its reference product in clinical trials. Currently, SB5 is approved for storage for 36 months at 2–8 °C and may be stored at room temperature (25 °C) for a maximum period of 14 days. The objective of this study was to evaluate the stability of SB5, aged to its shelf-life of 36 months, at room temperature (25 ± 2 °C) and 60 ± 5% relative humidity (RH) for a period of 4 weeks, which is longer by 14 days than that of SB5 currently approved in the European Union.

Methods

This study evaluated the stability of SB5, aged to its shelf-life of 36 months, at room temperature (25 ± 2 °C) for a period of 4 weeks. Three independent batches of 36 months-aged SB5 were stored at 25 ± 2 °C and 60 ± 5% RH for 4 weeks. Samples were tested at 0, 2, and 4 weeks.

Results

Color, clarity, visible particles, pH, protein concentration, and particulate matter were consistent among the batches, and all the test results met the acceptance criteria at each time point. Percent charge variance was maintained over time. Percent of high molecular weight species detected, total purity, relative binding activity by TNF-alpha, and relative potency by TNF-alpha neutralization did not change over time within each batch, and all values were within the acceptance criteria limits.

Conclusion

SB5 aged for 36 months is physicochemically and biologically stable for 4 weeks at 25 ± 2 °C and 60 ± 5% RH, which is 2 weeks longer than the alternative storage condition as approved by the European Medicines Agency, which is at 25 °C for a period of up to 14 days.

Funding

Samsung Bioepis Co., Ltd.

Evaluation of similar quality attribute characteristics in SB5 and reference product of adalimumab

Biosimilars are biologic products that are highly similar to a licensed reference product in terms of quality, safety, and efficacy. SB5 is a biosimilar of Humira® (adalimumab) developed by Samsung Bioepis. To demonstrate its biosimilarity in quality to Humira®, we performed a comprehensive characterization in terms of structure, physicochemical properties, and biological properties following the International Conference on Harmonization, US Food and Drug Administration, and European Medicines Agency guidelines. We analyzed all available batches of SB5 and more than 100 EU- and US-sourced lots of Humira® using state-of-the-art methods whenever possible, and compared the two sets of data. The structural properties comprised primary and higher-order structures and N-glycosylation. The physicochemical characteristics were categorized into liquid chromatographic patterns and electrophoretic pattern concerning size and charge heterogeneity. The biological properties were examined by in vitro functional assays.

Overall, SB5 and Humira® were shown to be similar to each other in terms of quality attributes. For some of the quality attributes, minor differences were observed. However, the observed differences have been adequately addressed and demonstrated these do not translate into clinically meaningful differences in terms of safety, purity, and potency.

The intellectual profile of abused and neglected children in the Philippines: An analysis of SB5 IQ scores of sexually abused, physically abused and neglected children

Child abuse and neglect have been associated with cognitive deficits, among other effects on child development. This study explores the prediction that child abuse and neglect has an impact on Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales 5th Edition (SB5) IQ scores, in relation to gender, age and type of abuse experienced. 300 children with experiences of abuse and neglect were included in the study, comprising 100 sexually abused, 100 physically abused and 100 neglected children. Overall, all scores on the SB5 were found to be significantly lower than the minimum average scores on the test. Verbal IQ (VIQ) scores were likewise found to be significantly lower than Nonverbal IQ (NVIQ) scores. Full Scale IQ (FSIQ) scores did not reveal heterogeneity when gender was factored in. Age and type of abuse (with a moderate effect size) on the other hand, showed significant differences among groups. Statistical analyses of SB5 Factor Index Scores revealed that abused children, in general, have significantly higher Visual-Spatial Processing (VS) and Quantitative Reasoning (QR) scores and lower scores in Knowledge (KN). There was a large effect size found in such an analysis. Age (with a large effect size), gender and type of abuse (with moderate effect sizes) give significant variations to this obtained profile.