Search

Objective: This post hoc analysis compared the immunogenicity of the biosimilar adalimumab-adbm (Cyltezo) with the adalimumab reference product (RP; Humira) across indications, including rheumatoid arthritis (RA), Crohn's disease (CD) and plaque psoriasis (PsO), and by patient sex in the VOLTAIRE trials programme., Methods: In each active-comparator randomised controlled trial (RCT), immunogenicity was assessed at various time points by the proportion of patients with antidrug antibodies (ADAs) and neutralising antibodies (nAbs), using acid dissociation followed by electrochemiluminescence assay. Assay sensitivity was 50 ng/mL, and drug tolerance was ≥30 µg/mL (free drug) at the low positive control level., Results: Minor differences in immunogenicity parameters (ADAs, ADA titres and nAbs) were evident between adalimumab-adbm and adalimumab RP across these three immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs). The proportion of ADA-positive and nAb-positive patients increased from baseline over time in all three RCTs, as expected, and was similar in the RA and CD RCTs but with higher numbers of ADA-positive and nAb-positive patients reported in the PsO trial. Subgroup analysis by patient sex showed the same trend., Conclusions: Differences among the RCTs may partially be explained by concomitant background therapy (methotrexate) in the RA trial, stable doses of azathioprine, 6-mercaptopurine or methotrexate in 36% of patients with CD and absence of background therapy in the PsO RCT. The analyses further confirm the biosimilarity of adalimumab-adbm with the adalimumab RP across IMIDs and provide supporting evidence that adalimumab-adbm is an interchangeable biosimilar with consistent clinical results in patients originally treated with the RP., Trial Registration Numbers: VOLTAIRE-RA (NCT02137226; EudraCT 2012-002945-40); VOLTAIRE-CD (NCT02871635; EudraCT 2016-000612-14); VOLTAIRE-PsO (NCT02850965; EudraCT 2016-000613-79)., Competing Interests: Competing interests: VS reports consulting for AbbVie, Amgen, Aria, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bioventus, BlackRock, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celltrion, ChemoCentryx, Equillium, Gilead, Genentech/Roche, Glenmark, GSK, Horizon, Inmedix, Janssen, Kiniksa, Kypha, Lilly, Merck, MiMedx, Novartis, Pfizer, Priovant, Regeneron, Rheos, R-Pharma, Samsung, Sandoz, Sanofi, Scipher, Setpoint, Sorrento, Spherix and Tonix. SB reports previous employment by Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals. DM reports previous employment by Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Biosimilars have the potential to save a significant amount of money in cancer treatment costs. However, barriers exist in the adoption of biosimilar products. Japan introduced a new health policy in 2022 to promote the use of biosimilars in oncology by offering financial incentives to eligible hospitals. This study aims to examine the association between these financial incentives and prescription patterns., Methods: The study analyzed Diagnosis Procedure Combination (DPC) data to assess the impact of the new health policy on the use of biosimilar products in oncology. The policy provided an additional fee for hospitals using biosimilar products. The study included patients with specific types of cancer and analyzed the proportion of monthly biosimilar prescriptions using the number of prescriptions of reference and biosimilar products. A generalized synthetic control method was used for analysis., Results: From April 2020 to March 2023, the study involved 27,737 patients in 114 hospitals, with 63 eligible hospitals receiving financial incentives. The average number of prescriptions of the drugs (rituximab, trastuzumab, and bevacizumab) increased gradually in both eligible and ineligible hospitals. The financial incentives were associated with a significant increase in the proportion of biosimilar product prescriptions, with a monthly increase of 0.092 per month (95% CI, 0.040-0.145) [9.2%, 95% CI, 4.0-14.5] compared to ineligible hospitals., Conclusion: Our study indicates that providing financial incentives to hospitals to utilize biosimilar products increased their prescriptions. Japan's recent health policy of moderate financial incentives is an effective approach to increasing prescriptions of biosimilar products., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 Itoshima et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Background: Since 2015, an infliximab biosimilar, CT-P13, has been approved for commercial use in many countries, easing the economic burden borne by society and patients. Many clinical trials investigating CT-P13 for the treatment of IBD have been conducted and reported that it may be a substitute for infliximab. However, the differences between the efficacy of CT-P13 and infliximab-originator require further elucidation., Methods: Data on the rates of clinical response, clinical remission, and mucosal healing of IBD were pooled for random-effects model meta-analysis using Stata MP 17. A total of 30 studies were included., Results: The pooled risk of clinical remission rate of patients with Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis who were naïve to biologics at 08-14 weeks were 0.66 (95% CI, 0.58-0.75) and 0.48 (95% CI, 0.43-0.54), respectively, and at 100-104 weeks were 0.66 (95% CI, 0.49 to 0.84) and 0.71 (95% CI, 0.62 to 0.79) respectively. The pooled risk of clinical remission rate of patients with Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis who were transitioned from the original agent at 24-32 weeks were 0.84 (95% CI, 0.77-0.92) and 0.78 (95% CI, 0.63-0.93), respectively, and at 48-54 weeks were 0.72 (95% CI, 0.62 to 0.82) and 0.78 (95% CI, 0.71 to 0.86) respectively. The pooled rates for mucosal healing in ulcerative colitis were 0.56 (95% CI: 0.46 to 0.67) at 08-14 weeks, and 0.64 (95% CI: 0.42 to 0.85) at 48-54 weeks. RCT studies showed no significant change in efficacy after switching, whether Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis., Conclusions: CT-P13 is effective in short and long-term periods. The application of CT-P13 for the management of IBD was promising., Competing Interests: Declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate Not applicable. Consent for publication Not applicable. Competing interests The authors declare no competing interests., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Purpose: Squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) is the sixth most common cancer, with approximately 225,419 new cases with over 125,000 deaths annually in India. This trial compared the efficacy and safety of biosimilar cetuximab versus innovator cetuximab (IC) in combination with platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with recurrent locoregional or metastatic SCCHN., Methods: This phase III trial is a multicenter, randomized, double-blind and parallel group study performed in Indian patients with recurrent locoregional or metastatic SCCHN. Patients were randomly assigned in 2:1 ratio to receive biosimilar cetuximab and IC in combination with cisplatin and fluorouracil via intravenous infusions. The primary end points were disease control rate (DCR) and overall response rate (ORR) as per response evaluation criteria in solid tumors version 1.1. The secondary end points included pharmacokinetics (PK), immunogenicity, safety, and tolerability., Results: Of 180 patients enrolled, 120 patients received biosimilar cetuximab and 60 patients received IC treatment. No significant statistical difference was observed in the primary outcomes between two groups. Treatment difference in DCR and ORR response was found to be -5.21 (90% CI, -8.94 to -1.48) and -4.79 (90% CI, -19.42 to 9.84), respectively, indicating noninferiority to reference product. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs; biosimilar cetuximab: 89.2% v IC: 91.7%; P = .8364) and serious AEs (biosimilar cetuximab: 23.3% v IC: 13.3%; P = .0603) and PK parameters were comparable between treatment groups. The immunogenicity findings showed higher incidence of anticetuximab antibodies in the biosimilar cetuximab group compared with the IC group at the end of Study., Conclusion: The findings of this study demonstrated noninferiority along with comparable PK, safety, and immunogenicity of biosimilar cetuximab and IC in patients with recurrent or metastatic SCCHN.

Rationale: Adalimumab (ADA) is an antitumor necrosis factor agent that is used for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease. However, its cost has resulted in varying degrees of restricted access across global healthcare economies. Biosimilars are agents that contain a similar version of the active substance of an already approved original biologic agent and are intended to be used for the same indication as the reference product. In general, biosimilars follow the originator; therefore, information on its efficacy and safety had been few. Some studies have reported on replacement of the originator with a biosimilar of the same efficacy because of medical reasons., Patient Concerns: A 15-year-old girl with steroid-dependent ulcerative colitis that relapsed after vedolizumab was treated with ADA reference. Six weeks after starting ADA reference, her gastrointestinal symptoms had completely resolved, however, immediately after the eighth dose of ADA reference, redness, swelling, and pruritus were noted at the injection site on the left thigh., Diagnosis: Allergic reaction caused by the ADA reference., Intervention: ADA reference was changed to ADA biosimilar LBAL., Outcomes: ADA biosimilar LBAL was continued without any symptoms, such as local swelling, redness, or itching. In addition, there was no deterioration of gastrointestinal symptoms., Lessons: We showed the efficacy and safety of ADA biosimilar LBAL as an alternative to ADA reference, which caused injection site reactions. Changing from ADA reference to ADA biosimilar because of adverse events may be an option that needs careful observation, considering that the originator and the biosimilar are not exactly the same., Competing Interests: The authors have no funding and conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

A biosimilar medicine is a successor to a reference ('originator'/'original-brand') biologic medicine brought to market once the patent and exclusive marketing rights for the reference have expired. Biosimilar natalizumab (PB006 [biosim-NTZ]; developed by Polpharma Biologics S.A. and marketed globally as Tyruko ® ; Sandoz) has been developed as a successor to reference natalizumab (Tysabri ® [ref-NTZ]; Biogen) and is the first US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved and European Medicines Agency (EMA)-approved biosimilar in neurology. As per the FDA and EMA indications for ref-NTZ, biosim-NTZ is approved to treat relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis (USA, EU) and Crohn's disease (USA only). Approval of biosim-NTZ was based on the 'totality of evidence', a comprehensive body of data collected during the development process, demonstrating similarity to its reference medicine. The foundational step of demonstrating structural and functional similarity between biosim-NTZ and ref-NTZ confirmed identical primary and indistinguishable higher order structures, as well as matching binding affinity to α4β1/α4β7 integrins. Following the confirmation of matching structure and function, pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic similarity of biosim-NTZ to ref-NTZ in healthy subjects was demonstrated, with no clinically meaningful differences identified in safety and immunogenicity. A comparative, double-blind, randomized study (Antelope) was also conducted in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis and demonstrated matching efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity with no clinically meaningful differences between biosim-NTZ and ref-NTZ. This review presents the totality of evidence that confirmed the biosimilarity of biosimilar natalizumab to its reference medicine, which supported its approval by the FDA and the EMA. [Graphical plain language summary available]., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background and Objectives: Biosimilars are cost-effective alternatives to reference products for patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) and chronic inflammatory rheumatic diseases (CIRD), but patient beliefs can affect adherence to the transition. This study aimed to explore patient experience and satisfaction after switching to CT-P17, a high-concentration (100 mg/mL), citrate-free adalimumab biosimilar., Patients and Methods: This observational, multicenter, prospective French study included adult patients with IBD or CIRD who switched to CT-P17 from reference adalimumab (R-ADA; 100 mg/mL) or a low-concentration adalimumab biosimilar (ADA-BioS; 50 mg/mL). Patients completed online questionnaires to assess treatment perceptions, satisfaction, and tolerance at study inclusion (under previous treatment) and over 3 months of CT-P17 treatment. The primary criterion was overall patient satisfaction, which was assessed with the question, "What is your global satisfaction with the CT-P17 injection?", using a 7-point Likert scale. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with increased treatment satisfaction after switching to CT-P17., Results: The total analysis population included 232 patients (IBD 72.0%, CIRD 28.0%). Median patient age was 57.0 years (interquartile range [IQR] 46.0-63.0), 50.4% were men, and median disease duration was 9 years (IQR 5-16). Approximately half of the cohort (51.2%) switched to CT-P17 from an ADA-BioS (including 19.4% from an ADA-BioS with citrate) and half (48.7%) from R-ADA. The proportion of patients who were satisfied with treatment was stable between baseline (under previous treatment) and 3 months (under CT-P17). More patients reported increased satisfaction after switching to CT-P17 from an ADA-BioS (22.7% vs 8.0% when switching from R-ADA; p = 0.002), or from an ADA-BioS containing citrate (28.9% vs 12.3% when switching from a citrate-free ADA-BioS; p = 0.008). Independent prognostic factors for increased satisfaction were previous treatment with an ADA-BioS (odds ratio [OR] 2.88 [95% confidence interval 1.17-7.08]; p = 0.021) and pain at the injection site under previous treatment (OR 1.26 [1.08-1.47]; p = 0.004). Significantly fewer patients reported pain, redness, itching, and hematoma after 3 months of CT-P17 treatment versus baseline (p < 0.001)., Conclusions: The majority of patients had stable or increased treatment satisfaction after switching from R-ADA or an ADA-BioS to CT-P17. In particular, switching to CT-P17 from a low-concentration ADA-BioS or an ADA-BioS containing citrate was associated with increased patient satisfaction. An improvement in overall tolerance with CT-P17 versus previous adalimumab treatment was also reported., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT05427942, registered June 22, 2022., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Unlike small molecule drugs and generic products, the active component of biologics and biosimilars are not identical chemical entities. Despite bioequivalence, there is limited evidence in clinical practice (i.e. Phase IV post-marketing surveillance) regarding the safety of biosimilar rituximab and even less so for "switching therapy" with respect to safety. Drug substitution by switching aims to realise cost savings by changing therapy involving a reference (biologic) product to a biosimilar. A retrospective analysis of safety outcomes including treatment-emergent adverse effects (TEAEs), rates of death and discontinuation of therapy, for all patients that received switching therapy (from reference to biosimilar rituximab, n = 33) was compared to patients who did not did not switch therapy (received biosimilar rituximab only, n = 18) at an Australian metropolitan cancer centre, over a six-month period. There was no statistical significant differences for any safety outcomes examined. Switching therapy for patients receiving rituximab does not lead to poorer safety outcomes., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Introduction: SCT510 is a biosimilar to bevacizumab (Avastin) reference product (RP) that is approved for various metastatic cancers. In this study, we aimed to demonstrate the equivalence of SCT510 and bevacizumab in terms of efficacy, safety, immunogenicity and pharmacokinetics (PK) in patients with advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)., Methods: Patients with non-squamous NSCLC were randomized equally to the SCT510 group (comprising SCT510, paclitaxel, and carboplatin) and the bevacizumab group (comprising bevacizumab, paclitaxel, and carboplatin) for 4-6 cycles, followed by maintenance monotherapy with SCT510. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR) at week 12. Secondary endpoints included 18-week ORR, disease control rate (DCR), duration of response (DoR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and 1-year survival rate, as well as assessments of safety, immunogenicity, and multi-dose PK analysis., Results: Between March 29, 2019, and April 27, 2021, 989 patients were screened and 567 eligible patients were randomly assigned to the SCT510 group (285 patients) and the bevacizumab group (282 patients). The ORR at week 12 was 52.6% [95% confidence interval (CI) 46.66-58.55%] in the SCT510 group and 52.5% (95% CI 46.47-58.47%) in the bevacizumab group. The ORR at week 18 was 55.4% (95% CI 49.46-61.30%) for SCT510 and 55.7% (95% CI 49.68-61.62%) for bevacizumab. The ORR risk ratio (RR) at weeks 12 and 18 was 0.99 (90% CI 0.873-1.133) and 0.99 (90% CI 0.872-1.114), respectively, both within the pre-specified equivalence margin of 0.75-1.33. There were no differences between the two groups in relation to other secondary endpoints, specifically DCR, DOR, PFS, OS, and 1-year survival rate. The overall safety findings were similar between the two treatment groups, and both SCT510 and bevacizumab RP exhibited low immunogenicity., Conclusions: SCT510 is similar to bevacizumab in clinical efficacy, safety, immunogenicity, and PK in patients with advanced non-squamous NSCLC. The totality of the evidence supports the clinical equivalence of SCT510 and bevacizumab., Trial Registration: NCT03792074., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Healthcare Ltd., part of Springer Nature.)

ABP 959 is a biosimilar to the eculizumab reference product (RP), which is approved for the treatment of patients with paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH). This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, two-period crossover study randomized eculizumab RP-treated patients with PNH to one of two treatment sequences (ABP 959/eculizumab RP or eculizumab RP/ABP 959) to evaluate the clinical similarity of ABP 959 when compared with eculizumab RP. This study evaluated the efficacy of ABP 959 when compared with eculizumab RP based on control of intravascular hemolysis as measured by lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and by the time-adjusted area under the effect curve of LDH. Secondary outcomes included safety, pharmacokinetics, and immunogenicity. Forty-two patients were randomized (20 in the ABP 959/eculizumab RP group and 22 in the eculizumab RP/ABP 959 group) across 25 centers. Similarity of efficacy was established by a ratio of geometric least squares means of LDH (ABP 959/eculizumab RP) of 1.0628, with a one-sided 97.5% upper CI of 1.1576 at week 27, and a geometric means ratio of time-adjusted area under the effect curve (ABP 959 vs. eculizumab RP) of LDH of 0.981, with a 90% CI of 0.9403-1.0239 from week 13 to 27, week 39 to 53, and week 65 to 79. All secondary efficacy endpoints were comparable between treatment groups. No new safety concerns were identified. The results of this study in patients with PNH, along with previously demonstrated similarity of analytical, nonclinical, and clinical pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in healthy volunteers support a demonstration of no clinically meaningful differences between ABP 959 and eculizumab RP. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03818607., (© 2024 The Author(s). American Journal of Hematology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

This 78-week (18-month) study conducted in 479 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis evaluated the efficacy, pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, safety, and immunogenicity of candidate biosimilar CT-P41 relative to US reference denosumab. CT-P41 had equivalent efficacy and pharmacodynamics to US-denosumab, with similar pharmacokinetics and comparable safety and immunogenicity profiles., Purpose: To demonstrate equivalence of candidate biosimilar CT-P41 and US reference denosumab (US-denosumab) in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis., Methods: This 78-week (18-month), double-blind, randomized, active-controlled Phase 3 study (NCT04757376) comprised two treatment periods (TPs). In TPI, patients (N = 479) were randomized 1:1 to 60 mg subcutaneous CT-P41 or US-denosumab. At Week 52, those who had received CT-P41 in TPI continued to do so. Those who had received US-denosumab were randomized (1:1) to continue treatment or switch to CT-P41 in TPII. The primary efficacy endpoint was percent change from baseline in lumbar spine bone mineral density at Week 52. Efficacy equivalence was concluded if associated 95% confidence intervals (CI) for least squares (LS) mean group differences fell within ± 1.503%. The primary pharmacodynamic (PD) endpoint was area under the effect curve for serum carboxy-terminal cross-linking telopeptide of type I collagen through the first 26 weeks, with an equivalence margin of 80-125% (for 95% CIs associated with geometric LS mean ratios)., Results: Equivalence was demonstrated for CT-P41 and US-denosumab with respect to primary efficacy (LS mean difference [95% CI]: - 0.139 [- 0.826, 0.548] in the full analysis set and - 0.280 [- 0.973, 0.414] in the per-protocol set) and PD (geometric LS mean ratio [95% CI]: 94.94 [90.75, 99.32]) endpoints. Secondary efficacy, PD, pharmacokinetics, and safety results were comparable among all groups up to Week 78, including after transitioning to CT-P41 from US-denosumab., Conclusions: CT-P41 was equivalent to US-denosumab in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis, with respect to primary efficacy and PD endpoints., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Multiple sclerosis is an inflammatory demyelinating disease and represents a global health concern. Ocrelizumab, a humanized IgG monoclonal antibody, selectively targets CD20 on B cells and CD20-expressing T cells. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of the biosimilar ocrelizumab candidate (Xacrel) to the originator product (Ocrevus) in Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis (RMS) patients. In this randomized trial, patients received either Xacrel or Ocrevus for 96 weeks. The primary endpoint was the equivalency of the medications in reducing the annualized relapse rate (ARR) at week 48. The secondary endpoints included time to the onset of disability progression confirmed at 12 and 24 weeks, the proportion of relapse-free patients, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) evaluations, safety assessments, and immunogenicity over 96 weeks. A total of 170 patients were randomized (1:1 ratio). In the per protocol analysis, the upper and lower limits of 95% two-sided confidence intervals of difference between treatments in the 48-week ARR rate were in the predefined margin of - 0.2 to 0.2 (- 0.002; 95% CI - 0.080 to 0.075). The two products were also comparable in terms of other efficacy parameters, safety, and immunogenicity. The results confirmed that Xacrel is equivalent to Ocrevus in terms of 48-week ARR in RMS patients, with no considerable difference in other efficacy parameters and the safety profile during the 96 weeks. The trial was registered in Iranian registry of clinical trials (IRCT) on 10/06/2019 with the registration number of IRCT20150303021315N13 and in Clinicaltrials.gov on 19/07/2021 with the registration code of NCT04966338., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are being used to prevent, detect, and treat a broad spectrum of malignancies and infectious and autoimmune diseases. Over the past few years, the market for mAbs has grown exponentially. They have become a significant part of many pharmaceutical product lines, and more than 250 therapeutic mAbs are undergoing clinical trials. Ever since the advent of hybridoma technology, antibody-based therapeutics were realized using murine antibodies which further progressed into humanized and fully human antibodies, reducing the risk of immunogenicity. Some of the benefits of using mAbs over conventional drugs include a drastic reduction in the chances of adverse reactions, interactions between drugs, and targeting specific proteins. While antibodies are very efficient, their higher production costs impede the process of commercialization. However, their cost factor has been improved by developing biosimilar antibodies, which are affordable versions of therapeutic antibodies. Along with biosimilars, innovations in antibody engineering have helped to design bio-better antibodies with improved efficacy than the conventional ones. These novel mAb-based therapeutics are set to revolutionize existing drug therapies targeting a wide spectrum of diseases, thereby meeting several unmet medical needs. In the future, mAbs generated by applying next-generation sequencing (NGS) are expected to become a powerful tool in clinical therapeutics. This article describes the methods of mAb production, pre-clinical and clinical development of mAbs, approved indications targeted by mAbs, and novel developments in the field of mAb research., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To demonstrate efficacy equivalence of CT-P47 and EU-approved reference tocilizumab (r-TCZ) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA)., Methods: This double-blind, phase III study randomised (1:1) patients to receive CT-P47 or r-TCZ (8 mg/kg) every 4 weeks until week 20 during treatment period (TP) 1. Prior to week 24 dosing, patients receiving r-TCZ were randomised (1:1) to continue r-TCZ or switch to CT-P47; patients receiving CT-P47 continued CT-P47 (TP2, 8 mg/kg every 4 weeks until week 48). The dual primary endpoints (for different regulatory requirements) were mean changes from baseline in Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28; erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR)) at week 12 and week 24. Efficacy equivalence was determined if CIs for the treatment difference were within predefined equivalence margins: (95% CI -0.6, 0.6 (analysis of covariance (ANCOVA)) at week 12 or 90% CI -0.6, 0.5 (ANCOVA with multiple imputation) at week 24). Additional efficacy, pharmacokinetic (PK) and safety endpoints, including immunogenicity, were investigated. Findings up to week 32 are presented., Results: In TP1, 471 patients were randomised (234 CT-P47; 237 r-TCZ). The 95% and 90% CIs for the estimated treatment differences were contained within the predefined equivalence margins; the estimated difference in DAS28-ESR at week 12 was -0.01 (95% CI -0.26, 0.24) and at week 24 was -0.10 (90% CI -0.30, 0.10). Secondary efficacy endpoints, PKs and overall safety were comparable between groups up to week 32., Conclusions: Efficacy equivalence, alongside comparable PK, safety and immunogenicity profiles, was determined between CT-P47 and r-TCZ in adults with RA, including after switching from r-TCZ to CT-P47., Competing Interests: Competing interests: JSS has received payments to institution from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Galapagos, and Roche; personal fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Ananda, Astro, BMS, Celltrion, Inc., Chugai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Immunovant, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, R-Pharma, Samsung, Sanofi, and UCB; payments or honoraria from Eli Lilly; and support for meeting attendance from Eli Lilly. MK has received support for meeting attendance from Accord, Egis, Medac, and Sandoz. SJ has received consulting fees from AbbVie, Celltrion, Inc., Eli Lilly, Gilead, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, and UCB; and payments or honoraria from AbbVie, Celltrion, Inc., Eli Lilly, Gilead, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, and UCB. RW has received speaker fees from Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, SOBI, and UCB; support for meeting attendance from AbbVie; and is involved in the leadership of the Polish Rheumatology Society. MKW has received payments or honoraria from AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Medac, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, SOBI and UCB; and support for meeting attendance from AbbVie, Medac, Novartis, Pfizer, and SOBI. PH has received research grants from Celltrion, Inc. GB has received honoraria for consulting and lectures from Celltrion, Inc., Chugai, Fresenius, and Sanofi. EK has received consulting fees/served on advisory boards for AbbVie, Celltrion, Inc., Eli Lilly, GSK, Pfizer, Sandoz, and Samsung Bioepsis; and has received speaker fees from AbbVie, Celltrion, Inc., GSK, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, and Sandoz. SHK is an employee of Celltrion, Inc. YJB, YBJ, GEY, and JWH are employees of Celltrion, Inc., and hold stocks in Celltrion, Inc. JT, AR, JJ, AZ, AD, KK, and PAK report no disclosures., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: This study aims to compare the cost-effectiveness of sintilimab in combination with chemotherapy, with or without bevacizumab biosimilar IBI305, versus chemotherapy alone for patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who have progressed on tyrosine-kinase inhibitor (TKI) treatment from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system., Methods: 10-year Markov model was developed using a 21-day cycle length. Transition probabilities were derived from the ORIENT-31 trial, while cost and health state utilities were obtained from publicly databases, local hospitals, and published literature. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated as the primary model output and compared to a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold range of $15,289.34 to $38,223.34 per quality-adjusted life-years (QALY). Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the robustness of the model., Results: In the base-case analysis, sintilimab plus IBI305 and chemotherapy had an ICER of $53,266.32/QALYs, exceeding the upper WTP threshold. Sintilimab plus chemotherapy had an ICER of $15,329.11/QALY, slightly above the lower WTP threshold. Subgroup analysis yielded consistent results. Deterministic sensitivity analyses found no ICER for sintilimab plus chemotherapy beyond the upper WTP threshold. Most model input changes did not decrease the ICER of sintilimab plus IBI305 and chemotherapy below the upper WTP threshold. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses further demonstrated the cost-effectiveness superiority of sintilimab plus chemotherapy over sintilimab plus IBI305 and chemotherapy., Conclusion: This study supports the cost-effectiveness of using sintilimab in combination with chemotherapy. Nevertheless, the cost-effectiveness of combining sintilimab with IBI305 and chemotherapy in this particular patient group may be lacking., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 Peng et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Objectives: Biosimilars are anticipated to be widely used in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), owing to their cost efficiency; LBEC0101 was the first etanercept (ETN) biosimilar approved in Japan. However, there are limited real-world data comparing its safety and effectiveness with those of a reference product., Methods: This study used data from the Kyoto University Rheumatoid Arthritis Management Alliance cohort, including patients with RA who received ETN therapy-ETN reference product (ETN-RP) or LBEC0101-between 2015 and 2021. Serum ETN levels were measured using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry., Results: The 1-year continuation rates of ETN-RP and LBEC0101 were 58.7% and 74.4%, respectively. Effectiveness of treatment was evaluated in 18 patients; both products significantly reduced the 28-joint RA disease activity score and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR). Moreover, to determine equivalence, we analysed 11 patients who switched from ETN-RP to LBEC0101; the DAS28-ESR and serum ETN levels before and after switching were not significantly different., Conclusions: This real-world cohort study confirmed that the biosimilar of ETN, LBEC0101, was comparable to the reference product in terms of continuation rate, effectiveness at initiation of introduction, and effect persistence before and after switching in clinical practice., (© Japan College of Rheumatology 2024. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are used to prevent, detect, and treat a broad spectrum of non-communicable and communicable diseases. Over the past few years, the market for mAbs has grown exponentially with an expected compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 11.07% from 2024 (237.64 billion USD estimated at the end of 2023) to 2033 (679.03 billion USD expected by the end of 2033). Ever since the advent of hybridoma technology introduced in 1975, antibody-based therapeutics were realized using murine antibodies which further progressed into humanized and fully human antibodies, reducing the risk of immunogenicity. Some benefits of using mAbs over conventional drugs include a drastic reduction in the chances of adverse reactions, interactions between drugs, and targeting specific proteins. While antibodies are very efficient, their higher production costs impede the process of commercialization. However, their cost factor has been improved by developing biosimilar antibodies as affordable versions of therapeutic antibodies. Along with the recent advancements and innovations in antibody engineering have helped and will furtherly help to design bio-better antibodies with improved efficacy than the conventional ones. These novel mAb-based therapeutics are set to revolutionize existing drug therapies targeting a wide spectrum of diseases, thereby meeting several unmet medical needs. This review provides comprehensive insights into the current fundamental landscape of mAbs development and applications and the key factors influencing the future projections, advancement, and incorporation of such promising immunotherapeutic candidates as a confrontation approach against a wide list of diseases, with a rationalistic mentioning of any limitations facing this field., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Biosimilars are highly similar, but not identical, versions of originator biologic medications. Switching patients to biosimilars presents an opportunity to mitigate rising drug costs and expand patient access to important biologic therapies. However, decreased patient acceptance and adherence to biosimilar medications have been reported, which can lead to loss of treatment response, adverse reactions, and inefficient resource utilization. Understanding patient perceptions of biosimilars and biosimilar switching is needed to inform patient-centered care strategies that promote efficient resource utilization., Methods: We used democratic deliberation methods to solicit the informed and considered opinions of patients regarding biosimilar switching. Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD; n = 29) from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) participated in 5-hour deliberation sessions over two days. Following educational presentations with experts, participants engaged in facilitated small group discussions. Transcripts and facilitators' notes were used to identify key themes. Participants completed surveys pre- and post-deliberation to collect sociodemographic and clinical features as well as to assess IBD treatment knowledge and attitudes toward care and approaches to biosimilar switching., Results: Five major themes emerged from the small group discussions in the context of biosimilar switching: 1) concerns about adverse consequences and unclear risk-benefit balance; (2) importance of communication and transparency; (3) desire for shared decision making and patient involvement in treatment decisions; (4) balancing cost-saving with competing priorities; and (5) advocating for individualized care and prioritization based on risk levels. These views led participants to favor approaches that prioritize switching the sickest patients last (i.e., those with poorly controlled disease) and that offer patients control and choices around biosimilar switching. Participants also expressed preferences for combining elements of different approaches to maximize fairness., Conclusions: Approaches to biosimilar switching should consider patients' desires for transparency and effective communication about biosimilar switching and engagement in their medical decision-making as part of patient-centered care. Incorporating patient preferences around biosimilar switching is critical when navigating the quality and affordability of care in resource constrained settings, both within the VHA and in other healthcare systems., (© 2024. This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply.)

Objective/purpose: Compare outcomes and costs of TNF-alpha inhibitor biosimilars to reference medications in the treatment of pediatric NIU., Methods: Patients 18 years old or below treated with reference or biosimilar TNF-alpha inhibitor for noninfectious uveitis and had a history of active ocular inflammation with at least 1 month of ophthalmology follow-up from January 1, 2013, to June 1, 2023, were included. Retrospective chart review was performed., Results: Nineteen patients met the inclusion criteria. Mean age was 9.3±4.0 years, and 47.4% (9/19) were female. Of the patients who were on infliximab at any time point in their disease course (n=9), the mean duration on infliximab was 3.6 years (42 mo). Of the patients on biosimilar infliximab (n=10), the mean duration was 0.82 years (9.8 mo). Mean flares/year was 0.22±0.3 on infliximab and 0.15±0.3 on biosimilar infliximab. The average annual cost was $42,298.97 for infliximab (n =9), $41,141 for infliximab-dyyb (n=9), and $40,950 for infliximab-axxq (n=1). Reasons for switching to biosimilar infliximab from adalimumab included a combination of insurance mandate (100%), worsening disease activity (37.5%), or other issues such as noncompliance (37.5%)., Conclusions: The most common reason for biosimilar initiation was insurance mandate. Compared with the reference infliximab, pediatric patients had fewer number of flares per year on biosimilar infliximab, but they were also on the biosimilar for a shorter duration of time compared with the reference which may confound an accurate assessment. Biosimilar infliximab had a lower cost profile compared with reference infliximab., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) poses significant healthcare challenges in Latin America (LA) due to its high prevalence and unique healthcare dynamics. Despite global advancements, LA faces specific hurdles in effectively managing RA., Areas Covered: This review examines RA epidemiology, treatment strategies, and clinical challenges in LA. RA prevalence varies, with higher rates among indigenous populations. While conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) are recommended as first-line therapy, access remains inconsistent. Biologics and targeted synthetic DMARDs are available, but biosimilars have limited accessibility, with drug prices varying significantly. Key barriers include supply interruptions, diagnosis delays, and high non-adherence rates driven by socioeconomic factors. A severe shortage of rheumatologists, particularly in rural areas, affects patient care. Cardiovascular events, comorbidities, and endemic infections further complicate RA management., Expert Opinion: Although RA care in LA has improved through better use of csDMARDs and advanced treatments, major challenges persist, such as a shortage of specialists, limited medical education, and fragmented healthcare systems. Expanding training programs, enhancing telemedicine, and ensuring drug supply continuity are essential. Strengthening clinical research, improving access to affordable treatments, and developing comprehensive, region-specific strategies are crucial to closing the gap between LA and more developed regions in RA care..

Background: Trastuzumab is an antihuman epidermal growth factor receptor 2 monoclonal antibody used to treat breast and other cancers. Trastuzumab biosimilars were approved in the United States beginning in 2017. Utilization information on these biosimilars is limited., Objective: To examine utilization patterns and characteristics of patients treated with trastuzumab (biosimilars and reference) and other human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 products., Methods: We evaluated health care claims data from the Biologics and Biosimilars Collective Intelligence Consortium distributed research network, representing a large, geographically diverse US population of commercially insured individuals. We queried 4 distributed research network health plan partners to capture product usage data and patient information from October 1, 2016, to October 31, 2022. Patients were required to be continuously enrolled in their health plan for at least 365 days before their first observed trastuzumab utilization date in this study period. Data were aggregated across data partners., Results: More than 16 million eligible health plan members representing more than 31 million person-years of data were evaluated. We identified 5,984 incident treatment episodes; 3,878 (64.8%) episodes were with the reference trastuzumab. The mean ages were consistent across trastuzumab products (60.2 to 65.1 years) and at least 80% of the episodes were among female patients. The mean comorbidity index score was 1.2 (SD = 1.9) among users of the reference vs the biosimilars (range 1.2-2.5). Other clinical characteristics (eg, diabetes, hypertension) were comparable across products. The proportion of total incident episodes of the reference trastuzumab decreased substantially over time (96% in 2016 vs 28% in 2021) as utilization of the biosimilars increased (eg, use of trastuzumab-anns increased from 2% [2019] to 36% [2021]). Similar utilization trends were seen among patients with and without metastatic breast cancer., Conclusions: Trastuzumab biosimilars utilization has grown since their introduction to the US market. Exploration of these biosimilars' comparative effectiveness and safety to their reference product is warranted.

Purpose: The Phase 3 Mylight study was designed to confirm clinical equivalence of proposed biosimilar aflibercept (SOK583A1; Sandoz [proposed biosimilar aflibercept, SDZ-AFL]) to its reference biologic (Eylea; Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc; Bayer AG [reference aflibercept, Ref-AFL])., Method: Mylight was a prospective, double-masked, 2-arm, parallel Phase 3 study. Participants with neovascular age-related macular degeneration were randomized 1:1 to receive eight injections of SDZ-AFL (n = 244) or Ref-AFL (n = 240) over 48 weeks. The primary endpoint was mean change in best-corrected visual acuity score from baseline to Week 8. Secondary endpoints included anatomical outcomes, best-corrected visual acuity at Weeks 24 and 52, safety, and pharmacokinetics., Results: Similarity in mean change in best-corrected visual acuity score was established between SDZ-AFL (n = 235) and Ref-AFL (n = 226) at Week 8 (difference: -0.3 [90% CI, -1.5 to 1.0]) and Week 52. No clinically meaningful differences occurred between groups in anatomical outcomes. Safety profiles were similar, with comparable incidences of treatment-related adverse events (SDZ-AFL: 2.5%; Ref-AFL: 2.9%). The incidence of anti-drug antibodies was similar between groups. Systemic free aflibercept concentrations 24 hours postdose were low and comparable between SDZ-AFL and Ref-AFL., Conclusion: Proposed biosimilar aflibercept matched reference aflibercept in efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics in participants with neovascular age-related macular degeneration. Therefore, this Phase 3 study confirmed biosimilarity of SDZ-AFL to Ref-AFL., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the Opthalmic Communications Society, Inc.)

Introduction: In the era of immunotherapy, bevacizumab seems to be losing its place in NSCLC treatment algorithms. The aim of this work is to try to define the advantages and disadvantages of NSCLC treatment with bevacizumab in combination regimens., Areas Covered: We conducted a literature search in PubMed and Google Scholar to review the most important topics regarding bevacizumab treatment in NSCLC, with or without driver mutations, including trials with checkpoint inhibitors. Special emphasis was placed on the analysis of data on the treatment of patients with CNS metastases., Expert Opinion: Bevacizumab is an antiangiogenic compound whose addition to chemotherapy made the first major breakthrough in the treatment of NSCLC. However, for the last 10 years or so, the use of combination immunotherapy regimens has suppressed the use and acquisition of new knowledge about bevacizumab. Newer data are primarily related to the treatment of EGFR-positive NSCLC patients with bevacizumab, with only a few larger studies investigating the use of a combination of bevacizumab and checkpoint inhibitors. The basic task remains to define the place of bevacizumab in treatment algorithms.

Introduction: The approval of biosimilars in the management of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) has offered an answer to a growing concern about healthcare costs, and availability of treatments. Several studies have been conducted to demonstrate proof of biosimilars effectiveness as treatment in Crohn's disease (CD)., Areas Covered: Since 2013, the European Medicines Agency has approved five biosimilars for infliximab and eight for adalimumab. Initial data leading to approval were extrapolated from studies conducted in patients with rheumatological or dermatological diseases, but recent studies filled the gap of clinical data among patients with IBD. In this review, 75 studies were included, with data from a total of 20 707 patients with CD. Clinical data on biosimilars in the treatment of CD show equivalence in terms of efficacy, either as induction or maintenance of treatment and regardless of previous exposure to originator or other biosimilar., Expert Opinion: Since biosimilar market entry, utilization of infliximab increased by 89.9% and by 22.4% for adalimumab in European countries. With a 10-year insight since the first approval of biosimilar in Europe, biosimilars prescriptions should be implemented in routine clinical practice given the efficacy and safety profile.

Importance: Biosimilars may be lower-cost alternatives to originator biologic products, potentially offering expanded access or reduced economic burden, but have not been evaluated with aflibercept in diabetic macular edema (DME)., Objective: To compare efficacy and safety of MYL-1701P, an aflibercept biosimilar, with reference aflibercept (Eylea [Regeneron]) in DME., Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a double-masked, randomized clinical trial that included participants at 77 centers across the US, Europe, Japan, and India. Included in the analysis were individuals 18 years and older with type 1 or type 2 diabetes with central DME and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) letter score of 73 to 38 in the study eye using an Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart. Study data were analyzed from October to December 2021., Interventions: Formulations of MYL-1701P (0.5-mg vial) or reference aflibercept every 4 weeks for 5 consecutive intravitreal injections, followed by every 8 weeks through week 52., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the adjusted difference in least squares mean (SE) change from baseline BCVA letter score at week 8 with an equivalence margin of -3 to +3 letters. Secondary outcomes included change in central subfield thickness (CST), BCVA, number of injections over 52 weeks, incidence of adverse events (AEs), and antidrug antibodies (ADAs)., Results: A total of 355 participants (mean [SD] age, 62.2 [9.2] years; 216 male [60.8%]) were randomized to MYL-1701P (179 participants [50.4%]) and aflibercept (176 participants [49.6%]). At week 8, mean (SE) change in BCVA was 6.60 (0.55) letters vs 6.56 (0.55) letters in the MYL-1701P vs aflibercept groups. The adjusted mean difference of 0.04 letters (90% CI, -1.16 to 1.24 letters) met the primary outcome. At week 8, mean (SE) change in CST was -112 (7) μm vs -124 (7) μm in the MYL-1701P vs aflibercept groups (adjusted mean difference, 12 μm; 90% CI, -3 to 26 μm). The incidence of treatment-emergent AEs in the MYL-1701P and aflibercept arms were ocular (30.9% [55 of 178] vs 29.5% [52 of 176]), serious ocular (0.6% [1 of 178] vs 1.1% [2 of 176]), nonocular (65.2% [116 of 178] vs 65.3% [115 of 176]), and serious nonocular (16.9% [30 of 178] vs 11.9% [21 of 176]). The mean (SD) total number of injections was 8.4 (2.1) vs 8.7 (1.8) in the MYL-1701P vs aflibercept groups. The incidence of treatment-induced or treatment-boosted ADAs was 2.8% (5 of 177) vs 5.7% (10 of 176) in the MYL-1701P vs aflibercept arms., Conclusions and Relevance: MYL-1701P demonstrated clinical equivalence in regard to efficacy, with comparable safety and immunogenicity, to reference aflibercept. These findings support use of MLY-1701P as an alternative to reference aflibercept., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03610646.

Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of insulin degludec biosimilar B01411 (HS-IDeg) with originator insulin degludec-Tresiba (NN-IDeg) in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who were inadequately controlled on oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs) for at least 3 months., Methods: This multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, active-controlled, phase 3 study enrolled 362 participants with T2DM. Participants were stratified according to whether the insulin secretagogue (sulfonylurea or glinide) had been used before the screening and then randomized 1:1 to receive once-daily subcutaneous injections of HS-IDeg ( n  = 180) or NN-IDeg ( n  = 182) for 18 weeks. The primary endpoint was the change from baseline in glycated hemoglobin (HbA 1c ) to week 18., Results: At week 18, the least squares (LS) mean change in HbA 1c from baseline was -1.34% (95% CI -1.47 to -1.21) and -1.25% (95% CI -1.38 to -1.12) with HS-IDeg and NN-IDeg, respectively. The LS mean difference (HS-IDeg minus NN-IDeg) in HbA 1c at week 18 was -0.09% (95% CI -0.28 to 0.10), demonstrating non-inferiority of HS-IDeg to NN-IDeg. Participants achieving HbA 1c <7.0% at week 18 were 34.5% and 29.5% with HS-IDeg and NN-IDeg, respectively. Mean decreases in fasting plasma glucose and standard deviation of blood glucose were similar between both groups. Safety and tolerability, including hypoglycemia, adverse events, and weight change were similar between both groups. No severe hypoglycemia and no death occurred in the study., Conclusions: HS-IDeg and NN-IDeg demonstrated similar efficacy and safety over 18 weeks of treatment in Chinese patients with T2DM who had inadequate responses to OADs for at least 3 months.

Background: This study evaluated physicians' and patients' beliefs about biosimilars in Hong Kong, India, Pakistan, Singapore, Taiwan, and Thailand., Research Design and Methods: An online survey administered to physicians (dermatologists, n  = 119; gastroenterologists, n  = 148; rheumatologists, n  = 161) between 22 October 2021 and 7 January 2022, and patients ( n  = 90) with rheumatic or inflammatory bowel disease between 25 October 2021 and 12 April 2022., Results: Most (68%) physicians reported having a strong knowledge about biosimilars, yet 49% indicated that biosimilars are readily available to them. Physicians cited potential cost savings (81%) as the main benefit of biosimilars, and cost/coverage support (36%), patient support (25%), and increasing biosimilar awareness/education (24%) as main strategies for improving usage. Few (21%) patients reported having a strong knowledge about biosimilars. Patients cited offering alternatives in case of drug shortages (77%) as the main benefit of biosimilars, and cost/coverage support (53%), increasing awareness of product profile (22%), and providing biosimilars with a good efficacy profile/effective product (19%) as main strategies for improving usage., Conclusion: Programs focused on cost/coverage support, patient support, and biosimilar awareness could improve acceptance of biosimilars for chronic immune-mediated inflammatory diseases in Asian countries, thereby increasing patient access to essential biologic therapies.

Introduction: To evaluate the efficacy, safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity of ZRC-3277 (pertuzumab biosimilar) with Perjeta® (pertuzumab) in previously untreated patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC)., Patients and Methods: This phase III, multicenter, double-blind study across 38 sites in India randomized (1:1) patients with HER2-positive MBC in either the ZRC-3277 or Perjeta® group. Both groups also received trastuzumab and docetaxel. Of 268 enrolled patients, mITT population had 243 patients (119 and 124 in the ZRC-3277 and Perjeta® groups, respectively). The primary objective was to compare the between-group objective response rate (ORR) after 6 cycles of treatment. ORR was determined by evaluating scans of computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging following Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumor (RECIST 1.1). Two-sided 95% confidence interval (95% CI) for the difference in ORR was determined to evaluate the noninferiority of ZRC-3277 to Perjeta®. The secondary outcomes included the assessment of PK, immunogenicity, and safety between the 2 groups., Results: In the mITT population, 104 (87.39%) and 114 (91.94%) participants achieved the ORR in the ZRC-3277 and Perjeta® groups, respectively. For predefined -15% noninferiority margin, obtained 2-sided 95% CIs (-12.19%, 3.11%) for the difference in ORR (-4.55%) between the 2 groups demonstrated the noninferiority of ZRC-3277 to Perjeta®. PK, immunogenicity, and safety were not significantly different between the 2 groups., Conclusion: Efficacy, PK, immunogenicity, and safety profiles of ZRC-3277 was found to be similar to those of Perjeta®., Competing Interests: Disclosure Deven Parmar is an employee of Zydus Therapeutics Inc, USA, whereas Maulik Doshi and Rahul Shrivastava are employees of Zydus Lifesciences Ltd. All other authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

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, mm 3 ) 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 mm 3 at pre-switching to 244.14 ± 60.31 μm ( p  = 0.032) and 8.11 ± 1.20 mm 3 ( 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.

Background: Patient satisfaction has been positively associated with adherence which is expected to impact outcomes. Although vital for successful implementation of biosimilar medicines, little is known about the patient perspective of transition., Aim: The aim of this study was to investigate clinical outcomes and patient experience of transitioning between reference adalimumab and a biosimilar (SB5)., Method: iBaSS is a phase IV single-centre, prospective, randomised, single-blind, cross-over study in adult subjects with Crohn's disease. Participants, stable on adalimumab before consent, received 24 weeks of treatment with both reference adalimumab and SB5. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients maintaining baseline clinical status throughout each treatment period, with patients' perspective of disease control and treatment satisfaction assessed as secondary outcomes., Results: A total of 112 participants, representative of the heterogeneous patient populations encountered in routine clinical practice, were enrolled. A similar proportion of participants maintained baseline clinical status through each treatment period: 81.8% with reference adalimumab and 79.5% with SB5. Patient reported outcomes (IBD-Control questionnaire (SB5: 15.5; reference adalimumab 15) and TSQM), adverse events and therapeutic drug monitoring remained consistent through both treatment periods, although a higher median injection pain VAS score was noted with SB5 (53/100 versus 6/100 with reference adalimumab). The number of switches undertaken in the study did not impact serum drug concentration or immunogenicity., Conclusion: This study, mimicking real world adalimumab transition, demonstrates that patients undertaking brand transition can be expected to have consistent clinical and satisfaction outcomes., Clinical Trial Registered With Eudract: Number 2018-004967-30., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.)

Purpose: To describe the frequency of uveitis recurrences in patients with non-infectious uveitis treated with the biosimilar infliximab-dyyb., Design: Retrospective case series., Methods: Records of uveitis patients treated with the biosimilar infliximab-dyyb between 2016 and 2022 at two institutions were reviewed. Data extracted included patient demographics, diagnosis, previous originator infliximab use, additional immunosuppression medications, infliximab-dyyb use, reason for switch, disease activity, and follow-up time., Results: A total of 14 patients were identified. Seven patients were switched from originator infliximab to a biosimilar for nonmedical/non-ocular reasons (insurance prompted the switch). One patient was started directly on infliximab-dyyb due to active joint disease despite well-controlled uveitis. None of these eight patients developed inflammation after the switch. Six patients were started directly on infliximab-dyyb due to poorly controlled uveitis. Of these, five patients achieved disease quiescence during follow-up. The mean dose of originator was 1.79 mg/kg/week, with a median dosing schedule of 4 weeks prior to therapy with infliximab-dyyb. The mean final infliximab-dyyb dosage was 1.81 mg/kg/week, with a median dosing schedule of 4 weeks., Conclusion: Infliximab-dyyb appears to be efficacious in achieving and maintaining uveitis control.

The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) listed the infliximab (IFX) biosimilar, IFX-dyyb (Inflectra), on the Veterans Affairs National Formulary (VANF) in May 2017. In September 2018, biosimilar IFX-abda (Renflexis) became the VANF IFX product. The recommended formulary changes from one IFX biosimilar to another provided a unique opportunity to study IFX utilization patterns in IFX-naïve Veterans with Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD). This study aimed to describe IFX and healthcare utilization during the 365 days after initiation with IFX reference product (RP) or biosimilars IFX-dyyb and IFX-adba. This descriptive study was performed using the VHA Corporate Data Warehouse. All Veterans initiated on IFX-RP (Remicade) or biosimilars IFX-dyyb and IFX-adba between September 1, 2016 and December 30, 2019 were included and followed for 365 days. Veterans enrolled in the VHA for at least 365 days with no evidence of IFX before their index date were considered IFX-naïve. Continuous data on IFX use, laboratory measurements, and healthcare utilization were reported with means, 95% confidence interval (CI), medians, and interquartile ranges. Frequency, proportions, and 95% CIs were presented for categorical variables. Statistical tests included ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis for continuous outcomes, Poisson regression for count-based outcomes (i.e., healthcare utilization visits), and Chi-square for dichotomous outcomes. The study identified 1763 IFX-naïve patients with IBD, and 785, 441, and 537 was indexed to RP, IFX-dyyb, and IFX-adba, respectively. Statistical differences were observed in IFX utilization measures related to dosing, adherence, and persistence. The proportion of days covered (PDC) during the 365-day follow-up period varied among the IFX groups: IFX-RP at 66%, IFX-dyyb at 60%, and IFX-abda at 69% (P value < .001). Persistence with the index IFX product during the 365-day follow-up period also varied: IFX-RP at 43%, IFX-dyyb at 32%, and IFX-abda at 51% (P value < .001). Healthcare utilization and laboratory findings were similar among the IFX groups. IFX utilization and laboratory patterns were clinically similar among the IFX biosimilars and RP groups, suggesting that providers did not modify their practice with biosimilars. Statistically significant differences in IFX utilization patterns are explained by formulary dynamics when the VANF product switched from IFX-dyyb to IFX-abda., (Copyright © 2024 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Background: Equivalent efficacy and comparable pharmacokinetic, immunogenicity, and safety profiles of the biosimilar BAT1806/BIIB800 and reference tocilizumab (TCZ) in participants with moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have been reported up to week 24 (treatment period [TP] 1) of the phase 3 study. Here we present results for TP2 (study weeks 24-48)., Methods: In this phase 3, multicenter, multiregional, double-blind, active-controlled, equivalence study, participants with active RA despite methotrexate were randomized (1:1:2) to intravenous administration of 8 mg/kg TCZ every 4 weeks to week 48 (TCZ group), or TCZ to week 24 followed by BAT1806/BIIB800 to week 48 (TCZ to BAT1806/BIIB800 group), or BAT1806/BIIB800 to week 48 (BAT1806/BIIB800 group). Efficacy in TP2 was evaluated using American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response criteria (ACR20/50/70) and change from baseline in Disease Activity Score on 28 joints (DAS28). Pharmacokinetics (trough levels), safety, and immunogenicity were also evaluated., Results: Of 621 randomized participants, 577 (92.9%) completed TP1 and entered TP2 (TCZ: N = 145 [93.5%]; TCZ to BAT1806/BIIB800: N = 142 [92.2%]; BAT1806/BIIB800: N = 290 [92.9%]). Proportions of ACR20 responders were similar between treatment groups throughout TP2 (87.8%, 90.3%, and 90.4%, respectively, at week 48), as were proportions of ACR50 and ACR70 responders, and reduction in DAS28. Drug trough levels and antidrug antibody incidences were comparable between the treatment groups. Adverse events were balanced across the treatment groups and no fatal events were reported., Conclusion: In TP2, efficacy, safety, immunogenicity, and pharmacokinetic profiles were comparable between the TCZ, TCZ to BAT1806/BIIB800, and BAT1806/BIIB800 groups., Trial Registration: NCT03830203 and EudraCT 2018-002202-31., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Objective: In Malaysia, there is now a dearth of recommendations pertaining to the priority of biologic treatments for the effective management of psoriasis, given the multitude of available therapeutic alternatives. Present analysis reports results of a cost-effectiveness model that determines the most optimal arrangement of biologic treatments, with a particular focus of adding biosimilars to the existing treatment pathway for psoriasis in Malaysia., Methods: A Markov model was developed to compare the cost effectiveness of various biologic sequential treatments in a hypothetical cohort of moderate to severe psoriasis patient in Malaysia over a lifetime horizon. The model simulated the progression of patients through three lines of active biologic therapy, before transitioning to best supportive care. Costs and effects were discounted annually at a rate of 3%., Results: First line secukinumab has produced lowest incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICERs) when compared to first line systemic [ICERs value; US$152,474 (first set analysis) and US$110,572 (second set analysis)] and first line phototherapy [ICERs value; US$147,057 (first set analysis) and US$107,616 (second set analysis)]. However, these values were slightly higher than the Malaysian based threshold of three times gross domestic product per capita, US$104,337. A 40% reduction in the unit costs of reference biologics renders most of the evaluated treatment sequences cost-effective., Conclusion: Adding biosimilar to the current treatment sequence could achieve cost savings ranging from 4.3% to 10.8% without significant loss of effectiveness. Given the significant impact of comorbidities and the resulting decline in quality of life among individuals with psoriasis, it may be justifiable to establish a threshold of up to US$184,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) for the provision of therapies in the context of Malaysia., Competing Interests: The authors have no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article., (Copyright: © 2024 Azizam et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Objectives: To analyse clinical outcomes of a non-medical switch from originator adalimumab (ADA) to its ABP501 biosimilar (ABP) over 6 months in patients with inflammatory rheumatic musculoskeletal diseases (RMD) in relation to comorbidity as a risk factor for therapy discontinuation., Methods: RMD patients switching from originator ADA to ABP were identified from a large routine database from October 2018 onwards. Documented clinical data at the time of non-medical switching (baseline), and at 3 and 6 months were collected. Comorbidities were represented by the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) at baseline and patients were categorized based on CCI > 0. Differences in the ABP retention rate over 6 months between patients with CCI = 0 and patients with CCI > 0 were analysed using Bayesian exponential regression., Results: A total of 111 patients with axial spondyloarthritis (n = 68), rheumatoid arthritis (n = 23) and psoriatic arthritis (n = 15), were identified, 74.8% of whom had continued treatment with ABP after 6 months, while a smaller proportion had either switched to another ADA biosimilar (10.8%), switched back to originator ADA (7.2%), switched to a different biologic (3.6%), or dropped out (3.6%). At baseline, a CCI > 0 was found in 38% of patients. Cardiovascular comorbidities (40%) were most prevalent followed by diseases of the skin (33%), the gastrointestinal tract (20%) and the eye (20%). ABP treatment was continued after 6 months in 74% of patients with CCI = 0 and in 76% with CCI > 0. Bayesian analysis showed only a small difference (months) in the APB continuation rate between groups (estimate 0.0012, 95% credible interval (CrI) -0.0337 to 0.0361). Adjusting for age, sex, and disease subtype revealed somewhat shorter retention rates for patients with CCI > 0, but the distribution of the difference included 0 (estimate -0.0689, 95% CrI -0.2246 to 0.0234)., Conclusion: In a non-medical switch scenario of RMD patients, there was no evidence for a considerable difference in ABP retention rates over 6 months between comorbidity groups., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: QL1701 is a proposed biosimilar to the reference trastuzumab (Herceptin®). This trial compared the efficacy and safety of QL1701 with the reference trastuzumab in first-line treatment of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive metastatic breast cancer., Materials and Methods: This randomized, double-blinded, parallel-controlled, phase III equivalence trial was conducted in 73 centers in China. Eligible patients with histologically or cytologically diagnosed HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer were randomly assigned (1 : 1) to receive either QL1701 or reference trastuzumab in combination with docetaxel (every 3 weeks) for eight cycles as the first-line treatment. Then, in patients with objective responses or stable disease, the QL1701 or reference trastuzumab with or without docetaxel was maintained for totally up to 12 months if tolerated. The primary endpoint was 24-week objective response rate (ORR) assessed by an independent review committee (IRC). The equivalence margin was 0.80-1.25 with a 90% confidence interval (CI) for the ORR ratio (QL1701 to reference trastuzumab)., Results: Between 29 April 2020 and 15 March 2022, 474 patients were randomized, and 473 received either QL1701 (n = 236) or reference trastuzumab (n = 237). The risk ratio for 24-week ORR was 1.07 (90% CI 0.94-1.21). The 90% CI fell within the pre-specified equivalence margin of 0.80-1.25. The 24-week ORR assessed by IRC was 59.7% (95% CI 53.2% to 66.1%) versus 56.1% (95% CI 49.5% to 62.5%) in QL1701 and the reference trastuzumab, respectively. As of 12 April 2023, there were no notable differences in progression-free survival (median: 8.3 versus 8.4 months) and overall survival (1-year rate: 95.1% versus 93.3%) between the two groups. Safety, pharmacokinetic (PK), and immunogenicity profiles were similar between the two groups., Conclusion: QL1701 demonstrated equivalent efficacy and similar safety to the reference trastuzumab when combined with docetaxel in the first-line treatment of patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer, with similar PK and immunogenicity profiles., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: While Pegaspargase is an essential component of the treatment of acute lymphoid leukemia (ALL) in children, it causes adverse events (AEs) that sometimes make full use impossible., Objective: The objective was to investigate the safety of Pegaspargase biosimilar in pediatric ALL patients undergoing treatment according to ICiCLe ALL-14 protocol., Method and Materials: A prospective study was carried out in a university teaching hospital located in the state of Maharashtra, India. Data on clinical factors and adverse reaction characteristics were gathered from hospital medical records. Suspected AEs were classified according to causality and severity., Results: During the study period, 72 children had 52 suspicions of AEs during treatment with biosimilar Pegaspargase. The odds ratio of 1.11 (95%CI, 0.41-2.98) suggested that males and females were both equally likely to experience adverse drug events, despite the fact that the frequency of suspected AEs was higher in boys (66%) than in girls (33%). None of the patients experienced allergic reactions. The high-risk category had the highest number of suspected AEs (56%), followed by intermediate risk (20%) and standard risk (20%). These patients showed a high frequency of suspected AEs during the induction phase (43%) followed by the consolidation phase (26%). Sixty percent of the reactions were classified as grade 1 or 2. ALL cell type ( p  = 0.02), risk category ( p  = 0.04) and length of hospitalization ( p  = 0.003) were significantly correlated with suspected AEs., Conclusion: Bio-similar Pegaspargase in combination with chemotherapy was safe and tolerable in the pediatric ALL patients treated according to ICiCLe ALL-14 protocol. Suspected AEs ranged from mild to moderate and hepatic failure and hyperglycemia being severe., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Objective: To analyze the long-term survival of subcutaneous biosimilar tumor necrosis factor inhibitors compared to the originator molecules in patients with rheumatic diseases, as well as the factors associated with drug discontinuation., Methods: Retrospective analysis of BIOBADASER, the Spanish multicenter prospective registry of patients with rheumatic disease receiving biologic and targeted disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Patients who started etanercept (ETN) or adalimumab (ADA) from January 2016 to October 2023 were included. The survival probabilities of biosimilars and originators were compared using Kaplan-Meier estimating curves. To identify factors associated with differences in the retention rates, hazard ratios (HR) were estimated using Cox regression models for all and specific causes (inefficacy or adverse events [AEs]) of discontinuation., Results: A total of 4162 patients received 4723 treatment courses (2991 courses of ADA and 1732 courses of ETN), of which 722 (15.29%) were with originator molecules and 4001 (84.71%) were with biosimilars. The originators were more frequently discontinued than biosimilars (53.32% vs 33.37%, respectively). The main reason for discontinuation was inefficacy (60.35% of the treatments). The risk of overall discontinuation was lower for biosimilars (adjusted HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.75-0.95). Female sex, obesity, and second or later treatment lines increased the risk of discontinuation, whereas disease duration and the use of concomitant methotrexate were associated with a greater survival. When assessing cause-specific reasons of discontinuation, excluding nonmedical switching, the results from the crude and adjusted analyses showed no significant differences in the retention rate between biosimilars and originators., Conclusion: No significant differences were found between treatments in long-term survival due to inefficacy or AEs., (Copyright © 2024 by the Journal of Rheumatology.)

Objective: To compare the immunogenicity, safety, and efficacy of Gan & Lee insulin glargine (GL Glargine) with that of the originator insulin glargine (Lantus) in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM)., Methods: This was a phase 3, multicenter, randomized, open-label, equivalence study. Five hundred seventy-six subjects with T1DM were randomized 1:1 to receive either GL Glargine or Lantus treatment for 26 weeks. The primary end point was the percentage of subjects in each treatment group who developed treatment-induced anti-insulin antibody after baseline and up to visit week 26, which was evaluated using a country-adjusted logistic regression model. The study also compared the changes in glycated hemoglobin, and adverse events including hypoglycemia., Results: The percentage of subjects positive for treatment-induced anti-insulin antibody by Week 26 was 25.8% in the GL Glargine treatment group and 25.3% in the Lantus treatment group, with a 90% confidence interval (-5.4, 6.5) of the difference in proportions that fell completely between the similarity margins (-11.3, 11.3). The least squares mean difference between treatment groups for changes in glycated hemoglobin was -0.08 (90% confidence interval: -0.23, 0.06), and the other immunogenicity and safety profiles were comparable., Conclusion: GL Glargine demonstrated similar immunogenicity, efficacy, and safety compared to Lantus over 26 weeks in patients with T1DM., Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 AACE. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: This randomized, parallel-controlled, double-blinded, phase III equivalence study evaluated the equivalence of a proposed pertuzumab biosimilar QL1209 to the pertuzumab (Perjeta®) each with trastuzumab and docetaxel in neoadjuvant treatment of early or locally advanced breast cancer patients with HER2-positive, ER/PR-negative., Methods: Eligible patients were randomly (1:1) assigned to receive 4 cycles of neoadjuvant QL1209 or pertuzumab each with trastuzumab and docetaxel, and adjuvant treatment. The primary endpoint was total pathologic complete response (tpCR), with equivalence margins of 0.76 to 1.32., Results: Among the 585 patients enrolled, 257 and 259 patients were assigned to the QL1209 and pertuzumab groups, respectively. The tpCR rates were comparable in the QL1209 (109/255, 42.75%; 90% CI 37.65 to 47.84) and pertuzumab (117/259, 45.17%; 90% CI 40.09 to 50.26) groups. The tpCR risk ratio was 0.95 (90% CI, 0.80 to 1.11), and the 90% CI fell within the predefined equivalence margin. The most common grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse event was decreased neutrophil count (10. 9% vs. 12.7%) in the QL1209 and pertuzumab groups., Conclusions: QL1209 demonstrated equivalent efficacy and comparable safety profile to the reference pertuzumab in neoadjuvant treatment of HER2-positive, ER/PR-negative, early, or locally advanced breast cancer., Trial Registration: Chinadrugtrials.org CTR20201073; ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04629846., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Objective: We aim to compare drug effectiveness and persistence between the reference etanercept (ETN) and ETN biosimilar SB4 in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) naive to ETN and to investigate drug effectiveness and persistence in those undergoing a mandatory nonmedical switch from ETN to SB4., Methods: We used a retrospective comparative database study including 1,138 patients with PsA treated with ETN or SB4 (years 1999-2021) in Norway. Disease activity score in 28 joints (DAS28) and drug persistence were compared between unmatched ETN (n = 644) and SB4 (n = 252) cohorts and in matched analyses (n = 144, both cohorts) at baseline using a propensity score (PS) to adjust for confounders. Drug persistence was analyzed with the Kaplan-Meier method., Results: In unmatched analyses, difference in change from baseline between ETN (n = 140) and SB4 (n = 132) for DAS28 at one year was mean 0.67 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.38-0.96) in favor of ETN. In PS-matched analyses, the difference in change from baseline between ETN (n = 54) and SB4 (n = 54) was mean 0.09 (95% CI -0.33 to 0.50), and the mean difference assessed with an analysis of covariance model was 0.01 (95% CI -0.38 to 0.40), both within predefined equivalence margin (±0.6). Drug persistence at one year was mean 0.75 (95% CI 0.71-0.78) for ETN, mean 0.58 (95% CI 0.51-0.63) for SB4, hazard ratio (HR) 2.45 (95% CI 2.02-2.97) in unmatched analysis, and mean 0.55 (95% CI 0.46-0.63) for ETN, mean 0.60 (95% CI 0.51-0.67) for SB4, HR 1.29 (95%CI 0.94-1.76) in PS-matched cohorts., Conclusion: At one year, outcomes for PsA disease activity and drug persistence were comparable for patients treated with either ETN or SB4. In patients undergoing a mandatory nonmedical switch from ETN to SB4, drug effectiveness was maintained during a two-year period., (© 2024 The Authors. Arthritis Care & Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Rheumatology.)

Background: Ustekinumab (UST) is a safe and effective treatment for moderate-to-severe psoriasis., Objectives: To compare efficacy, safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity of the proposed UST biosimilar SB17 with reference UST in subjects with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis., Methods: In this randomized double-blind study, subjects were randomized to receive 45 mg of SB17 or UST subcutaneously at week 0, 4, and every 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was the percent change from baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index at week 12 with an equivalence margin of [-15%, 15%]. Other secondary efficacy, safety, PK, and immunogenicity endpoints were measured through week 28., Results: Two hundred forty-nine subjects were randomized to SB17, 254 to UST. Adjusted difference of Psoriasis Area and Severity Index change from baseline at week 12 of -0.6% (95% confidence interval; -3.780, 2.579) was within the equivalence margin. Physician's Global Assessment and Dermatology Life Quality Index were also comparable. Overall treatment-emergent adverse events were comparable (SB17: 48.2%, UST: 48.8%). The overall incidence of antidrug antibodies up to Week 28 was 13.3% with SB17 and 39.4% with UST., Limitations: Data were only through week 28., Conclusion: SB17 was clinically biosimilar to UST up to week 28., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest Dr Feldman has received research, speaking, and/or consulting support from Eli Lilly and Company, GlaxoSmithKline/Stiefel, AbbVie, Janssen, Alovtech, vTv Therapeutics, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Samsung Bioepis, Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Amgen, Dermavant, Arcutis, Novartis, Novan, UCB, Helsinn, Sun Pharma, Almirall, Galderma, Leo Pharma, Mylan, Celgene, Ortho Dermatology, Menlo, Merck & Co, Qurient, Forte, Arena, Biocon, Accordant, Argenx, Sanofi, Regeneron, the National Biological Corporation, Caremark, Teladoc, BMS, Ono, Micreos, Eurofins, Informa, UpToDate, and the National Psoriasis Foundation. Dr Feldman is founder and part owner of Causa Research and holds stock in Sensal Health. Dr Narbutt is an investigator and/or lecturer for Novartis, Eli Lilly, Almirall, AbbVie, Celltrion, Pfizer, Leo Pharma, Janssen, and UCB and participated in SB17-3001 study as an investigator and received investigational grant from Samsung Bioepis. Dr Girolomoni has received personal fees from AbbVie, Abiogen, Almirall, Amgen, Biogen, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli-Lilly, Leo Pharma, Merck Serono, Novartis, Pfizer, Samsung Bioepis, and Sanofi. Drs Brzezicki, Reznichenko, Zegadlo-Myłik, Pulka, Dmowska-Stecewicz, Klujszo, Rekalov, and Rajzer participated in SB17-3001 study as an investigator and received investigator grants from Samsung Bioepis. Authors J. Lee, M. Lee, and Dr Rho are employees of Samsung Bioepis Co, Ltd and owns stocks of Samsung Biologics., (Copyright © 2024 American Academy of Dermatology, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To assess the noninferiority of biosimilar aflibercept (P041, CinnaGen) to the originator aflibercept (AFL, Regeneron) in terms of efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity., Design: This was a phase Ш, 52-week, multicenter, randomized, double-masked, and active control trial involving eyes in a 1:1 ratio., Subjects: Patients with active subfoveal choroidal neovascularization secondary to age-related macular degeneration randomized into the 2 groups of P041 and AFL., Methods: Patients received an injection of aflibercept every 4 weeks for 3 doses, followed by administration every 8 weeks up to week 48., Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome was the noninferiority analysis of eyes maintaining vision at week 52. Secondary outcomes included the changes in visual acuity and retinal thickness, safety evaluation, and immunogenicity during the study., Results: In total, 168 eyes of 168 patients were included. At week 52, the proportion of patients maintaining vision was 94.44% in the P041 group compared with 94.52% in the AFL group. The 95% confidence interval (CI) for the difference of maintaining vision from baseline did not exceed the predefined noninferiority margin of 10% (difference, -0.0008; 95% CI, -0.074 to 0.074; P = 0.98). Secondary outcomes indicated similar results in both arms (all P > 0.05). Safety measured outcomes and immunogenicity were similar between the 2 study groups., Conclusions: Biosimilar aflibercept was noninferior to AFL in eyes with neovascular age-related macular degeneration. Other efficacy and safety findings also indicated the similarity of 2 products., Financial Disclosures: Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article., (Copyright © 2024 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

A combination of improvements in patient survival, increasing treatment duration, and the development of more expensive agents has led to a doubling of per-capita spending on cancer medicines in Ireland (2008-2018). Despite this, access to new drugs is poor in comparison to other EU countries. We examine methods to optimise oncology drug spending to facilitate access to newer anticancer agents. Key targets for spending optimisation (biosimilar use, clinical trials and expanded access programs, waste reduction, avoidance of futile treatment, and altered drug scheduling) were identified through an exploratory analysis. A structured literature search was performed, with a focus on articles relevant to the Irish Healthcare system, supplemented by reports from statutory bodies. At the present time, EMA-approved agents are available once approved by the NCPE. Optimising drug costs occurs through guideline-based practice and biosimilar integration, the latter provides €80 million in cost savings annually. Access to novel therapies can occur via over 50 clinical trials and 28 currently available expanded access programmes. Additional strategies include reversion to weight-based immunotherapy dosing, potentially saving €400,000 per year in our centre alone, vial sharing, and optimisation of treatment schedules. A variety of techniques are being employed by oncologists to optimise costs and increase access to innovation for patients. Use of biosimilars, drug wastage, and prescribing at end of life should be audited as key performance indicators, which may lead to reflective practice on treatment planning. Such measures could further optimise oncology drug expenditure nationally facilitating approval of new agents., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Introduction: SB11 (Byooviz™; Samsung Bioepis Co., Ltd.) is a ranibizumab (Lucentis ® ; Genentech, Inc.) biosimilar targeting vascular endothelial growth factor A for the treatment of retinal diseases. The pre-filled syringe (PFS) presentation of SB11 offers an alternative administration method to the vial, with the potential for enhanced safety and efficient syringe preparation. The objective of this study was to assess the ability of healthcare professionals (HCPs) to follow the instructions for use to prepare and administer SB11 PFS intravitreal (IVT) injections to patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) or macular edema secondary to retinal vein occlusion (RVO)., Methods: This study was an open-label, single-arm, single-dose clinical study to evaluate the usability of the SB11 PFS in patients with nAMD or macular edema secondary to RVO. Four HCPs prepared and administered 0.5 mg SB11 PFS IVT injections to 34 patients. Product use task completion (12 tasks in total) was assessed by independent observers. Safety was assessed up to 7 days after injection of the investigational product., Results: A total of 34 patients were enrolled and completed the study. All 12 tasks were successfully completed in 34 (100%) patients without a use-related failure. Most patients (32 patients, 94.1%) experienced no adverse events (AEs), whereas 2 (5.9%) patients experienced three treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) which were mild to moderate in severity. There were no severe or serious TEAEs reported during the study., Conclusions: This study showed that HCPs were able to successfully prepare and administer the SB11 PFS via IVT injection. No unexpected safety issues were identified. The SB11 PFS is a promising alternative for therapeutic administration of SB11 in patients with retinal disease., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT06176963; EudraCT number 2021-003566-12., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

The possibilities of modern therapy for systemic sclerosis (SSc) remains limited, since most of the used drugs do not have a disease-modifying effect. This encourages the study of new approaches that potentially affect the fundamental pathological processes underlying the disease. One example is anti-B-cell therapy, in particular rituximab (RTX). Until now RTX does not have a registration for the treatment of SSc, but there is a large positive experience of its use, which is reflected in recent meta-analyses and clinical recommendations. Complicated and expensive methods for obtaining genetically engineered biological drugs (biologics) have contributed to the emergence of more accessible biosimilars, one of which is the RTX biosimilar, Acellbia (Biocad, Russian Federation). The ''biosimilar'' versions of RTX might reduce the cost of therapy and increase patients accessibility to this treatment option. The RTX biosimilar Acellbia (ACB) has received approval in Russian Federation in 2014 for all indications held by reference RTX (including rheumatoid arthritis and ANCA-associated vasculitis)., (© 2024. Pleiades Publishing, Ltd.)

Rituximab is a monoclonal antibody that targets CD20 antigen in B cells. For pemphigus, rituximab has been highly effective in steroid-sparing therapy for moderate to severe cases. Originator rituximab has demonstrated favorable treatment effects in patients with pemphigus, but its high cost remains a challenge. Biosimilar rituximab is expected to offer a potential solution. However, it is required for the comparative study of efficacy and safety between biosimilar and originator because all biosimilars may not be identical to the originator. In this study, we compared the treatment effects and safety of biosimilar (Truxima) and originator (MabThera) rituximab in patients with pemphigus. A final cohort of 52 patients in the MabThera group and 72 patients in the Truxima group was enrolled. Except for the intravenous immunoglobulin administration rate, there were no differences in baseline characteristics between the two groups, and for the purpose of comparing efficacy, investigations into time to complete remission, total steroid intake to complete remission, and total steroid intake for 6 months following rituximab treatment revealed no significant differences between the two groups. Truxima can be considered a relatively affordable alternative treatment option for pemphigus, offering cost-effectiveness to patients who are indicated for the treatment with MabThera., (© 2024 The Author(s). The Journal of Dermatology published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Japanese Dermatological Association.)

Background and Study Aims: The infliximab biosimilar CT-P13 was the first biosimilar drug targeting tumor necrosis factor-α. However, its efficacy and safety in real-world clinical situations have remained insufficient. Therefore, we aimed to verify the efficacy and safety of CT-P13 in bio-naïve patients with Crohn's disease., Patients and Methods: This retrospective multicenter study compared the remission rate at week 54 between patients with Crohn's disease who were treated with originator infliximab or CT-P13. Endoscopic and laboratory findings were assessed in both groups. A total of 184 (156 originator and 28 CT-P13) patients were analyzed. Of these, 138 originator users and 19 biosimilar users completed 54-week administration., Results: The clinical remission rates in patients taking originator infliximab of CT-P13 at week 54 were 92.5 % and 100 %, respectively. The endoscopic scores of each group significantly decreased from baseline at week 54 in both groups, and the mucosal healing rate at week 54 was 53 % and 64 %, respectively. Laboratory data including C-reactive protein, serum albumin, and hemoglobin significantly improved from baseline to week 14 and 54 in both groups. Adverse events were observed more frequently in the CT-P13 group (25 % vs. 4.5 %, p = 0.0015), but severe adverse events were rare in both groups., Conclusion: The efficacy and safety of CT-P13 were comparable with those of originator infliximab in bio-naïve patients with Crohn's disease evaluated by clinical, endoscopic, and laboratory findings. This study establishes the needed groundwork for the development of a strategy for treatment with biologics in patients with Crohn's disease., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interests The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Pan-Arab Association of Gastroenterology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)