Current Issue : April-June Volume : 2023 Issue Number : 2 Articles : 5 Articles
Introduction: Although short-term clinical trials have demonstrated that switching from infliximab (INF) bio-originator to its biosimilar is safe with no significant loss of efficacy, there are limited real-world data comparing their patterns of use and adherence. Methods: Using 2015–2018 IBM Marketscan data, we established 4 cohorts of patients with at least one administration or pharmacy claim for INF bio-originator or biosimilar in 2017, including INF naïve biosimilar users, INF prevalent biosimilar users, INF naïve bio-originator users, and INF prevalent bio-originator users, defined according to their prior use of INF from 2015 to their first INF administration in 2017. The proportion of days covered (PDC) was calculated for patients with at least 6, 12, or 18 months of follow-up time. Factors associated with optimal adherence (PDC > 80%) were evaluated using log-binomial models. Results: We identified 96 INF naïve biosimilar users, 223 INF prevalent biosimilar users, 2,149 INF naïve bio-originator users, and 10,970 INF prevalent bio-originator users. At the end of 18 months of follow-up, 64% of INF prevalent biooriginators, 48% of INF naïve biosimilars, 41% of INF naïve bio-originators, and 36% of INF prevalent biosimilars had optimal adherence. Depression, previous hospitalization, and greater use of prior biologics were negatively associated with adherence, whereas IBD diagnoses (referent to RA) and age 55–64 (referent to < 35) were positively associated with high adherence. Conclusion: INF prevalent users had higher adherence in our analyses than INF naïve users. However, further studies with larger sample size are needed to evaluate INF biosimilar users’ adherence....
Background: This study evaluated the existence of anti-drug antibodies (ADAs) before and 52 weeks after switching from intravenous infliximab (IFX) to intravenous CT-P13 in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods: We performed a prospective observational study. Twenty-eight patients (7 males and 21 females) received intravenous CT-P13 after intravenous IFX, and the clinical data were collected from medical records. Rheumatoid factor (RF) and anti-CCP antibody were examined at baseline. At baseline and 52 weeks after the start of CT-P13 treatment, the Disease Activity Score based on the 28-joint count and the levels of C-reactive protein, matrix metalloproteinase- 3, and ADA, as well as the erythrocyte sedimentation rate were evaluated. ADAs were measured using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay kit. Results: Seven (25%) and 6 (21.4%) cases were positive for ADAs at baseline and 52 weeks after, respectively. One case became newly positive for ADAs at week 52. Two of the ADA-positive cases became ADA-negative 52 weeks after. The ADA-positive group showed significantly higher RF values at baseline than the ADA-negative group (p = 0.03). No difference was observed between the ADA-positive group and the ADA-negative group regarding other clinical parameters. Conclusions: The positive rate of ADAs did not increase after switching from intravenous IFX to intravenous CT-P13. Among the patients with ADAs, a high level of RF was observed at baseline....
Background and Objectives: Real-world evidence should reflect the evidence obtained from controlled trials; therefore, the study aimed to compare biosimilar adalimumab (bADA) to original adalimumab (oADA) in terms of efficacy and safety in a real-life national cohort of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients. Materials and Methods: The following study is a prospective observational study in which we analyzed patients treated with reimbursed biologics from the Romanian Registry of Rheumatic Diseases (RRBR). RA cases must fulfill the 2010 classification criteria, as well as specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. The RRBR database was queried for all RA patients starting oADA or bADA (FKB327, GP2017, MSB11022, SB5 available) from 2 May 2019 (the first bADA initiation) until 26 March 2022 (study search date). Results: The study included 441 patients who started oADA (48.3%) or bADA (51.7%) in the same time period. At baseline, patients starting bADA had a significantly higher mean age and lower prevalence of women. After the first six months of treatment, there were no significant differences between the oADA and bADA regarding rates of Boolean (15.0% vs. 12.3%, p = 0.401), DAS28-CRP (32.4% vs. 34.2%, p = 0.686) and SDAI (16.4% vs. 14.0%, p = 0.483) remission rates. There were 107 cases of adverse events (AE): 81.3% on oADA and 18.7% on bADA. Notably, 51.4% of AE were infections. Regarding severity, 49.5% of AEs were mild, 34.6% were moderate, and 15.9% were severe. Conclusion: Biosimilar adalimumab showed similar efficacy and safety to original adalimumab after the first six months of treatment in RA patients from a national registry....
Background: Bevacizumab has played an important role in the systemic treatment of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) without gene mutation. In recent years, bevacizumab biosimilar has received marketing approval based on the results of phase III clinical studies. However, more clinical data are needed to verify the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab biosimilar in clinical application. Materials and methods: We identified 946 patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC who were treated with bevacizumab biosimilar or bevacizumab from January 1, 2019 to November 30, 2021. Comparisons and statistical analyses of bevacizumab biosimilar and bevacizumab were made in terms of efficacy and safety. Efficacy evaluation was performed directly in accordance with RECIST v1.1. Adverse events were graded following the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5.0. Results: The objective response rates (ORRs) were 28.9% in the biosimilar group (n=551) and 30.9% in the reference group (n=395; unstratified ORR risk ratio: 0.934, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.677–1.138; unstratified ORR risk difference: −0.020, 95% CI: −0.118–0.035). The estimated median progression-free survival (mPFS) were 6.27 (95% CI: 5.53–7.01) and 4.93 (95% CI: 4.24–5.62) months in the biosimilar and reference groups, respectively (P=0.296). The number of treatment lines, combined treatment regimens and with or without radiotherapy were significant factors affecting the PFS of both groups (P<0.001, P=0.001, P=0.039). Different genetic mutations and dose intensity were not the main factors affecting PFS (P=0.627, P=0.946). The incidences of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were 76.41% in the biosimilar group and 71.65% in the reference group (P=0.098). The incidences of grade 3 or higher TEAEs were 22.14% and 19.49% in the biosimilar and reference groups, respectively (P=0.324). Conclusions: Bevacizumab biosimilar is equivalent in efficacy to bevacizumab in patients with locally advanced and advanced NSCLC. It showed acceptable toxicity profile and no new adverse events. Patients who were excluded by clinical trials can also benefit from bevacizumab biosimilar....
Background: To analyze therapy adherence, safety, and outcome in adult patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) treated with the etanercept biosimilar Benepali® (Biogen Inc, Cambridge, USA). Methods: Data from the prospective registry, JuMBO (Juvenile arthritis MTX/Biologics long-term Observation), were used for the analysis. JuMBO is a long-term observational cohort study. It follows adult patients with JIA who were formerly included in the national JIA biologic register (BiKeR Registry). Both registries provide individual trajectories of clinical data and outcomes from childhood to adulthood in JIA patients treated with disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs). Results: Eighty-three patients from the German JuMBO registry were treated with Benepali®. Of these, 74% had switched from Enbrel® (Pfizer Inc., NYC, USA) the originator of etanercept to Benepali® for cost reasons. Therapy survival of patients treated with Benepali® in comparison to Enbrel® in patients matched by significant parameters was comparable. Adverse events (AE) were reported in 25.3% and serious adverse events (SAE) in 9.6% of patients. Physicians rated no SAE causative related to Benepali®. The majority of SAEs were surgical/medical procedures and there was only one infection. All efficacy parameters (cJADAS-10, Physician Global Assessment, number of joints with active arthritis, patients’ overall well-being, pain, and HAQ) demonstrated improvement over 24 months (p-values were not significant). 9.6% of patients permanently discontinued Benepali® because of an AE. Conclusions: Tolerability and effectiveness of the biosimilar Benepali® were satisfactory and therapy survival was comparable to the originator. Further data on therapy with biologics and biosimilars such as Benepali® must be collected by registries such as BiKeR and JuMBO in order to optimize therapy and patient outcomes and to reduce costs in the health system in the long term....
Loading....