Search

Background & Aims: CT-P13 subcutaneous (SC), an SC formulation of the intravenous (IV) infliximab biosimilar CT-P13 IV, creates a unique exposure profile. The LIBERTY studies aimed to demonstrate superiority of CT-P13 SC vs placebo as maintenance therapy in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC)., Methods: Two randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind studies were conducted in patients with moderately to severely active CD or UC and inadequate response or intolerance to corticosteroids and immunomodulators. All patients received open-label CT-P13 IV 5 mg/kg at weeks 0, 2, and 6. At week 10, clinical responders were randomized (2:1) to CT-P13 SC 120 mg or placebo every 2 weeks until week 54 (maintenance phase) using prefilled syringes. (Co-) primary end points were clinical remission and endoscopic response (CD) and clinical remission (UC) at week 54 (all-randomized population)., Results: Overall, 396 patients with CD and 548 patients with UC received induction treatment. At week 54 in the CD study, statistically significant higher proportions of CT-P13 SC-treated patients vs placebo-treated patients achieved clinical remission (62.3% vs 32.1%; P < .0001) and endoscopic response (51.1% vs 17.9%; P < .0001). In the UC study, clinical remission rates at week 54 were statistically significantly higher with CT-P13 SC vs placebo (43.2% vs 20.8%; P < .0001). Achievement of key secondary end points was significantly higher with CT-P13 SC vs placebo across both studies. CT-P13 SC was well tolerated, with no new safety signals identified., Conclusions: CT-P13 SC was more effective than placebo as maintenance therapy and was well tolerated in patients with moderately to severely active CD or UC who responded to CT-P13 IV induction., Clinicaltrials: gov, Numbers: NCT03945019 (CD) and NCT04205643 (UC)., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The Phase 3 CT-P6 3.2 study demonstrated equivalent efficacy and comparable safety between CT-P6 and reference trastuzumab in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2)-positive early breast cancer after up to 3 years' follow-up., Objective: To investigate long-term survival with CT-P6 and reference trastuzumab., Methods: In the CT-P6 3.2 study, patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer were randomised to neoadjuvant chemotherapy with CT-P6 or reference trastuzumab, surgery, and adjuvant CT-P6 or reference trastuzumab before a 3-year post-treatment follow-up. Patients who completed the study could enter a 3-year extension (CT-P6 4.2 study). Data were collected every 6 months to assess overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and progression-free survival (PFS)., Results: Of 549 patients enrolled in the CT-P6 3.2 study, 216 (39.3%) patients continued in the CT-P6 4.2 study (CT-P6, 107; reference trastuzumab, 109) (intention-to-treat extension set). Median follow-up was 76.4 months for both groups. Medians were not reached for time-to-event parameters; estimated hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for CT-P6 versus reference trastuzumab were 0.59 (0.17-2.02) for OS, 1.07 (0.50-2.32) for DFS, and 1.08 (0.50-2.34) for PFS. Corresponding 6-year survival rates in the CT-P6 and reference trastuzumab groups, respectively, were 0.96 (0.90-0.99) and 0.94 (0.87-0.97), 0.87 (0.78-0.92) and 0.89 (0.81-0.94), and 0.87 (0.78-0.92) and 0.89 (0.82-0.94)., Conclusions: Data from this extended follow-up of the CT-P6 3.2 study demonstrate the comparable long-term efficacy of CT-P6 and reference trastuzumab up to 6 years., Eudract Number: 2019-003518-15 (retrospectively registered 10 March 2020)., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Objective: To compare the safety and efficacy of switching from reference adalimumab to adalimumab biosimilar CT-P17 with continuing reference adalimumab/CT-P17 in active RA., Methods: This double-blind, phase III study randomized (1:1) subjects with active RA to receive 40 mg (100 mg/ml) CT-P17 or European Union-sourced reference adalimumab subcutaneously every 2 weeks (Q2W) until week (W) 24 [treatment period (TP) 1]. Thereafter, subjects receiving reference adalimumab were randomized (1:1) to continue reference adalimumab or switch to CT-P17 from W26 (both Q2W until W48; TP2). Subjects receiving CT-P17 in TP1 continued CT-P17. W0-W24 results were previously reported; we present W26-W52 findings. End points were efficacy (including joint damage progression), pharmacokinetics, safety and immunogenicity., Results: Of 607 subjects who initiated TP2 treatment, 303 continued CT-P17, 153 continued reference adalimumab and 151 switched to CT-P17. Efficacy improvements up to W24 were maintained during TP2; efficacy was comparable among groups. At W52, 20% improvement in ACR response rates were 80.5% (continued CT-P17), 77.8% (continued reference adalimumab) and 82.2% (switched to CT-P17). Joint damage progression was minimal. Mean trough serum adalimumab concentrations were similar among groups. CT-P17 and reference adalimumab safety profiles were numerically similar and switching did not affect immunogenicity. At W52, 28.4% (continued CT-P17), 27.0% (continued reference adalimumab) and 28.3% (switched to CT-P17) of subjects were anti-drug antibody-positive., Conclusion: Efficacy, pharmacokinetics, safety and immunogenicity of CT-P17 and reference adalimumab were comparable after 1 year of treatment, including after switching from reference adalimumab to CT-P17., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, http://clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03789292., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology.)

Aims: To evaluate pharmacokinetic equivalence and preliminary safety of the adalimumab biosimilar CT-P17 administered via autoinjector (CT-P17 AI) or prefilled syringe (CT-P17 PFS) in healthy subjects., Methods: This phase I, open-label study (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04295356) randomised subjects (1:1) to receive a single 40-mg (100 mg/mL) dose of CT-P17 AI or CT-P17 PFS. Primary endpoint was pharmacokinetic equivalence of CT-P17 AI to CT-P17 PFS for: area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity (AUC 0-inf ); area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to the last quantifiable concentration (AUC 0-last ); maximum serum concentration (C max ). Equivalence was determined if the 90% confidence interval for the geometric least-squares mean ratio was within the 80-125% equivalence margin. Additional pharmacokinetic endpoints, safety and immunogenicity were evaluated., Results: Of 193 subjects who were randomised (98 CT-P17 AI; 95 CT-P17 PFS), 180 received study drug. Pharmacokinetic equivalence was demonstrated: 90% confidence intervals were within the 80-125% equivalence margin (AUC 0-inf : 93.98-114.29; AUC 0-last : 91.09-121.86; C max : 94.08-111.90). Mean serum CT-P17 concentrations, secondary pharmacokinetic parameters and numbers of subjects with antidrug antibodies (ADAs) or neutralising ADAs were comparable between groups. AUC 0-inf , AUC 0-last and C max were numerically lower for ADA-positive than for ADA-negative subjects (both groups); pharmacokinetic equivalence was also demonstrated among ADA-positive subjects. CT-P17 AI and CT-P17 PFS were well tolerated, with comparable overall safety profiles., Conclusions: CT-P17 AI and CT-P17 PFS were pharmacokinetically equivalent. Overall safety and immunogenicity were comparable between the 2 delivery devices., (© 2021 Celltrion, Inc. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Pharmacological Society.)

Introduction: Long-term, real-world safety and effectiveness data are required to support biosimilar use. This analysis pooled 5-year findings from observational studies of infliximab biosimilar CT-P13 treatment in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), and ankylosing spondylitis (AS)., Methods: Patients enrolled in the CT-P13 4.2, 4.3, or 4.4 Korea/European Union registries were analysed if they had initiated infliximab treatment with CT-P13 (CT-P13 group) or had switched from reference infliximab to CT-P13 (switched to CT-P13 group). The primary objective was to investigate long-term safety by evaluating adverse events of special interest (AESIs) per the CT-P13 risk-management plan. Incidence rates per 100 patient-years (PYs) were calculated. Additional long-term safety endpoints, immunogenicity (assessments optional), and effectiveness were evaluated., Results: Overall, 736 patients (642 CT-P13; 94 switched to CT-P13) were analysed. Median (range) exposure to CT-P13 was 19.433 (0.03-63.11) months overall. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was 69.0% (CT-P13 group) and 60.6% (switched to CT-P13 group). Infusion-related reaction/hypersensitivity/anaphylactic reaction was the most frequent AESI overall, with an incidence of 4.3828 per 100 PY (95% confidence interval: 3.3603-5.6185). For most AESIs, incidence rates per 100 PY were broadly comparable between treatment groups, considering overlapping 95% confidence intervals. At baseline, 42/445 (9.4%) and 21/59 (35.6%) evaluable patients in the CT-P13 and switched to CT-P13 groups, respectively, were antidrug antibody (ADA)-positive. After CT-P13 treatment during the study, 188/425 (44.2%) evaluable patients had ≥ 1 ADA-positive result, including 147/425 (34.6%) patients with negative or no ADA results reported at baseline. Effectiveness tended to increase over time for all indications., Conclusion: The analysis did not identify any new safety findings for patients with RA, IBD, and AS treated with CT-P13 for up to 5 years in those who were infliximab-naïve at CT-P13 initiation, or those who had switched from reference infliximab to CT-P13., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT02557295 (CT-P13 4.2; retrospectively registered on 23 September 2015); NCT02326155 (CT-P13 4.3; retrospectively registered on 25 December 2014); NCT02557308 (CT-P13 4.4; retrospectively registered on 23 September 2015)., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Healthcare Ltd., part of Springer Nature.)

Purpose: Equivalent efficacy was demonstrated for the biosimilar CT-P6 and trastuzumab following neoadjuvant therapy for patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2)-positive early breast cancer. Following adjuvant treatment, efficacy and safety were comparable between treatments. We report updated safety and efficacy data after up to 3 years' follow-up., Methods: Following neoadjuvant chemotherapy with CT-P6/trastuzumab, patients underwent surgery and continued receiving adjuvant CT-P6/trastuzumab. The primary endpoint (previously reported) was pathological complete response. Time-to-event analyses (disease-free survival [DFS], progression-free survival [PFS], and overall survival [OS]), study drug-related and cardiac adverse events, and immunogenicity were assessed during post-treatment follow-up., Results: Most patients entered the follow-up period (CT-P6: 259 [95.6%]; trastuzumab: 269 [96.8%]). After a median follow-up of 38.7 (CT-P6) and 39.6 (trastuzumab) months, medians were not reached for time-to-event parameters; estimated hazard ratios (HRs) and 3-year survival rates were similar between groups. Estimated HRs (95% confidence intervals) for CT-P6 versus trastuzumab were 1.23 (0.78-1.93) for DFS, 1.31 (0.86-2.01) for PFS, and 1.10 (0.57-2.13) for OS (intention-to-treat population). Safety findings were comparable between groups for the overall study and follow-up period, including study drug-related cardiac disorders (CT-P6: 22 [8.1%] patients; trastuzumab: 24 [8.6%] patients [overall]) and decreases in left ventricular ejection fraction. Immunogenicity was similar between groups., Conclusion: The similarity of the time-to-event analyses between CT-P6 and trastuzumab supports the equivalence in terms of efficacy established for the primary endpoint. CT-P6 was well tolerated, with comparable safety and immunogenicity to trastuzumab. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02162667 (registered June 13, 2014)., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

This study aimed to demonstrate pharmacokinetic (PK) equivalence of a single dose of the proposed adalimumab biosimilar CT-P17 to United States-licensed adalimumab (US-adalimumab) and European Union-approved adalimumab (EU-adalimumab). This double-blind, parallel-group, phase I trial (clinicaltrials.gov NCT03970824) was conducted at 10 hospitals (Republic of Korea), in which healthy subjects (1:1:1) were randomized to receive a single 40 mg (100 mg/ml) subcutaneous injection of CT-P17, US-adalimumab, or EU-adalimumab. Primary end points were PK equivalence in terms of: area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity (AUC 0-inf ); AUC from time zero to the last quantifiable concentration (AUC 0-last ); and maximum serum concentration (C max ). PK equivalence was concluded if 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for percent ratios of geometric least squares means (GLSMs) for pairwise comparisons were within the equivalence margin of 80-125%. Additional PK end points, safety, and immunogenicity were evaluated. Of the 312 subjects who were randomized (103 CT-P17; 103 US-adalimumab; 106 EU-adalimumab), 308 subjects received study drug. AUC 0-inf , AUC 0-last , and C max were equivalent among CT-P17, US-adalimumab, and EU-adalimumab, because 90% CIs for the ratios of GLSMs were within the 80-125% equivalence margin for each pairwise comparison. Secondary PK end points, safety, and immunogenicity were similar between treatment groups. In conclusion, PK equivalence for single-dose administration of CT-P17, EU-adalimumab, and US-adalimumab was demonstrated in healthy adults. Safety and immunogenicity profiles were comparable between treatment groups and consistent with previous reports for adalimumab biosimilars., (© 2021 Celltrion, Inc. Clinical and Translational Science published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of the American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

Background & Aims: This study compared pharmacokinetics, symptomatic and endoscopic efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of a subcutaneous formulation of the infliximab biosimilar CT-P13 (CT-P13 SC) vs intravenous CT-P13 (CT-P13 IV) in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD)., Methods: This randomized, multicenter, open-label, parallel-group, phase 1 study enrolled tumor necrosis factor inhibitor-naïve patients with active ulcerative colitis (total Mayo score 6-12 points with endoscopic subscore ≥2) or Crohn's disease (Crohn's Disease Activity Index 220-450 points) at 50 centers. After CT-P13 IV induction at Week (W) 0/W2, patients were randomized (1:1) to receive CT-P13 SC every 2 weeks (q2w) from W6 to W54 or CT-P13 IV every 8 weeks from W6 to W22. At W30, all patients receiving CT-P13 IV switched to CT-P13 SC q2w until W54. The primary endpoint was noninferiority of CT-P13 SC to CT-P13 IV for observed predose CT-P13 concentration at W22 (C trough,W22 ), concluded if the lower bound of the 2-sided 90% confidence interval (CI) for the ratio of geometric least-squares means exceeded 80%., Results: Overall, 66 and 65 patients were randomized to CT-P13 SC and CT-P13 IV, respectively. The primary endpoint of noninferiority was met with a geometric least-squares means ratio for C trough,W22 of 1154.17% (90% CI 786.37-1694.00; n = 59 [CT-P13 SC]; n = 57 [CT-P13 IV]). W30/W54 clinical remission rates were comparable between arms. Other efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity assessments were also broadly comparable between arms, including after switching., Conclusions: The pharmacokinetic noninferiority of CT-P13 SC to CT-P13 IV, and the comparable efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity profiles, support the potential suitability of CT-P13 SC treatment in IBD. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02883452., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To assess non-inferiority of s.c. to i.v. CT-P13 in RA., Methods: Patients with active RA and inadequate response to MTX participated in this phase I/III double-blind study at 76 sites. Patients received CT-P13 i.v. 3 mg/kg [week (W) 0 and W2] before randomization (1:1) at W6 to CT-P13 s.c. via pre-filled syringe (PFS) 120 mg biweekly until W28, or CT-P13 i.v. 3 mg/kg every 8 weeks until W22. Randomization was stratified by country, W2 serum CRP and W6 body weight. From W30, all patients received CT-P13 s.c. In a usability sub-study, patients received CT-P13 s.c. via auto-injector (W46-54) then PFS (W56-64). The primary endpoint was change (decrease) from baseline in disease activity score in 28 joints (DAS28)-CRP at W22 (non-inferiority margin: -0.6)., Results: Of 357 patients enrolled, 343 were randomized to CT-P13 s.c. (n = 167) or CT-P13 i.v. (n = 176) at W6. The least-squares mean change (decrease) from baseline (standard error) in DAS28-CRP at W22 was 2.21 (0.22) for CT-P13 s.c. (n = 162) and 1.94 (0.21) for CT-P13 i.v. [n = 168; difference 0.27 (95% CI: 0.02, 0.52)], establishing non-inferiority. Efficacy findings were similar between arms at W54. Safety was similar between arms throughout: 92 (54.8%; CT-P13 s.c.) and 117 (66.9%; CT-P13 i.v.) patients experienced treatment-emergent adverse events (from W6). There were no treatment-related deaths or new safety findings. Usability was similar for CT-P13 s.c. via auto-injector or PFS., Conclusion: CT-P13 s.c. was non-inferior to CT-P13 i.v. in active RA. The convenience of s.c. administration could benefit patients., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03147248., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology.)

Background: To demonstrate equivalent efficacy of the proposed high-concentration (100 mg/ml), citrate-free adalimumab biosimilar CT-P17 to European Union-approved adalimumab (EU-adalimumab) in subjects with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA)., Methods: This randomized, double-blind phase III study ( ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT03789292) randomized (1:1) subjects with active RA at 52 centers to receive CT-P17 or EU-adalimumab 40 mg subcutaneously every 2 weeks until week 52. Results to week 24 are reported here. The primary endpoint was 20% improvement by American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR20) response rate at week 24. Equivalence was concluded if the corresponding confidence intervals (CIs) for the estimate of treatment difference were within predefined equivalence margins: - 15 to 15% (95% CI; European Medicines Agency assumption); - 12 to 15% (90% CI; Food and Drug Administration assumption). Additional efficacy, pharmacokinetic, usability, safety, and immunogenicity endpoints were evaluated., Results: 648 subjects were randomized (324 CT-P17; 324 EU-adalimumab). The ACR20 response rate at week 24 was 82.7% (n = 268/324) in both groups (intention-to-treat population). The 95% CI (- 5.94 to 5.94) and 90% CI (- 4.98 to 4.98) were within predefined equivalence margins for both assumptions and equivalent efficacy was concluded. Additional endpoints and overall safety were comparable between groups. Mean trough serum concentrations of CT-P17 were slightly higher than those of EU-adalimumab. Immunogenicity was slightly lower numerically for the CT-P17 group than for the EU-adalimumab group., Conclusions: CT-P17 and EU-adalimumab have equivalent efficacy and comparable safety and immunogenicity in subjects with active RA. Overall safety of CT-P17 is consistent with the known safety profile of reference adalimumab., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03789292 . Registered 28 December 2018-retrospectively registered.

Objectives: There are few comparative data for tumor necrosis factor inhibitors in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA)., Methods: Historical data for reference product/biosimilar intravenous infliximab, or adalimumab and etanercept, were pooled and compared with phase 3 study results for a subcutaneous (SC) formulation of the infliximab biosimilar CT-P13, in a systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO: CRD42019149621)., Results: The authors identified 13 eligible controlled trials that randomized over 5400 participants to prespecified treatments of interest. Comparison with pooled historical data suggested a numerical advantage for CT-P13 SC over intravenous infliximab for almost every prespecified efficacy outcome evaluated, including Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (C-reactive protein/erythrocyte sedimentation rate), Clinical/Simplified Disease Activity Index scores, American College of Rheumatology responses, and multiple measures of disease remission and low disease activity; for the majority of outcomes, there was no overlap in 95% confidence intervals between groups. A numerical advantage for CT-P13 SC was also observed for safety outcomes (adverse events, infections, and discontinuations). Similar, but less marked, trends were observed for comparison with historical efficacy and safety data for adalimumab/etanercept., Conclusion: CT-P13 SC offers an improved or similar benefit-to-harm ratio compared with infliximab (intravenous) and adalimumab/etanercept, for the treatment of moderate-to-severe RA.

Background: At EU marketing authorisation, safety data for CT-P13 (biosimilar infliximab) were limited, particularly in some indications, and uncommon adverse events (AEs) could not be evaluated among relatively small analysis populations., Objectives: Our objective was to investigate the overall safety profile and incidence rate of AEs of special interest (AESIs), including serious infections and tuberculosis, in CT-P13-treated patients., Methods: Data were pooled from six observational studies representing authorised indications of CT-P13 (ankylosing spondylitis, rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, plaque psoriasis, adult and paediatric Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis). Patients were analysed by indication and treatment (patients who received CT-P13 or those who switched from reference infliximab to CT-P13 ≤ 6 months prior to enrolment or during the study)., Results: Overall, 4393 patients were included (n = 3677 CT-P13 group; n = 716 switched group); 64.03% of patients had inflammatory bowel disease and 6.31% of patients were antidrug antibody positive. Overall, 32.94% and 9.58% of patients experienced treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) and treatment-emergent serious AEs, respectively. Across indications, TEAEs were more frequent with CT-P13 than with the switched group. Infections including tuberculosis were the most frequent serious AESI overall (2.48%) and by treatment group or indication. In total, 14 patients (0.32%) reported active tuberculosis. Overall incidence rates per 100 patient-years (95% confidence interval) were 3.40 (2.788-4.096) for serious infections including tuberculosis and 0.44 (0.238-0.732) for active tuberculosis. Infusion-related reactions were the second most frequent AESI following infection including tuberculosis., Conclusion: The CT-P13 safety profile appears consistent with previous studies for CT-P13 and reference infliximab, supporting the favourable risk/benefit balance for CT-P13 treatment.

As indicated in a recent published draft guidance on comparative analytical assessment, the United States (US) Food and Drug Administration (FDA) seems to suggest the use of quality range (QR) method for analytical similarity evaluation. It is a concern that the use of QR method for analytical similarity evaluation could potentially approve biological products which are not deemed biosimilar to the reference biological products. In this article, the limitations and potential risk for the use of the QR method for analytical similarity evaluation are discussed. Alternatively, two modified versions of the QR method, which are referred to as effect size (ES) mQR and plausibility interval (PI) mQR methods are suggested. The performance and statistical properties of the mQR methods are evaluated via extensive clinical trial simulation under various scenarios. The results indicate that the modified versions of the QR method not only overcome the limitations of the QR method for analytical similarity evaluation, but also can potentially help in detecting reference product changes during manufacturing process.

Under the US Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (BPCI), the development of biosimilar (test) products provides affordable alternatives to innovative biological (reference) products for the general patient population. However, in practice, as the number of biosimilar products available on the market increases, whether these biosimilars can be used interchangeably is a concern. Thus, using switching studies to evaluate the risk of reduced efficacy and increased safety concerns with and without switch(es) in the development of biosimilar products is of interest. For this purpose, the US FDA, in its recent draft guidance on interchangeability, suggested using a 2 × 2 crossover design (RT, RR) to evaluate a single switch and (RTR, RRR) and (RTRT, RRRR) to evaluate multiple switches. In this article, we examine the statistical properties, analyses, and sample size requirements of these switching study designs. We also investigate the relative efficiencies of these switching designs compared with the complete  n-of-1 trial design.

Background: The infliximab biosimilar CT-P13 was approved for use in Crohn's disease after clinical comparison with originator infliximab in ankylosing spondylitis and rheumatoid arthritis; however, concerns about such indication extrapolation have been expressed. This study investigated whether CT-P13 is non-inferior to infliximab in patients with Crohn's disease who were naive to biological therapy., Methods: In this randomised, multicentre, double-blind, phase 3 non-inferiority study, we enrolled patients with active Crohn's disease who had not responded to, or were intolerant to, non-biological treatments. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to receive CT-P13 then CT-P13, CT-P13 then infliximab, infliximab then infliximab, or infliximab then CT-P13, with switching occurring at week 30. Patients received 5 mg/kg CT-P13 or infliximab at weeks 0, 2, 6, and then every 8 weeks up to week 54. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with a decrease of 70 points or more in Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) from baseline to week 6. A non-inferiority margin of -20% was set (CT-P13 was non-inferior to infliximab if the lower limit of the two-sided 95% CI for the treatment difference was greater than -20). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02096861, and is completed., Findings: Between Aug 20, 2014, and Feb 15, 2017, 308 patients were assessed for eligibility, and 220 patients were enrolled: 111 were randomly assigned to initiate CT-P13 (56 to the CT-P13-CT-P13 group and 55 to the CT-P13-infliximab group) and 109 to initiate infliximab (54 to the infliximab-infliximab group and 55 to the infliximab-CT-P13 group). CDAI-70 response rates at week 6 were similar for CT-P13 (77 [69·4%, 95% CI 59·9 to 77·8] of 111) and infliximab (81 [74·3%, 95% CI 65·1 to 82·2] of 109; difference -4·9% [95% CI -16·9 to 7·3]), thereby establishing non-inferiority. Over the total study period, 147 (67%) patients experienced at least one treatment-emergent adverse event (36 [64%] in the CT-P13-CT-P13 group, 34 [62%] in the CT-P13-infliximab group, 37 [69%] in the infliximab-infliximab group, and 40 [73%] in the infliximab-CT-P13 group)., Interpretation: This study showed non-inferiority of CT-P13 to infliximab in patients with active Crohn's disease. Biosimilar CT-P13 could be a new option for the treatment of active Crohn's disease., Funding: Celltrion, Pfizer., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate long-term clinical outcomes of extended treatment with CT-P10, a rituximab biosimilar, compared with rituximab reference products sourced from the USA and the EU (US-RTX and EU-RTX) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) for up to 48 weeks., Methods: In this multinational, randomized, double-blind trial, adults with active RA received up to two courses of CT-P10, US-RTX, or EU-RTX alongside methotrexate. Efficacy endpoints included Disease Activity Score 28-joint count (DAS28) and American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response rates. Pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, immunogenicity, and safety were also assessed., Results: Of 372 patients randomized to the study drug, 330 (88.7%) completed the second treatment course. Mean change from baseline to week 48 in DAS28-C-reactive protein was comparable in the CT-P10 and combined rituximab (US-RTX and EU-RTX) groups (- 2.7 and - 2.6, respectively). ACR20, ACR50, and ACR70 response rates at week 48 indicated no differences between groups (80.6%, 55.4%, and 31.7% vs. 79.8%, 53.9%, and 33.7% in the CT-P10 and combined rituximab groups, respectively). Similar improvements in the Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index and all medical outcomes in the Short Form 36-Item Health Survey, including physical and mental health, were seen in all groups. At week 48, antidrug antibodies were detected in 4.9%, 9.4%, and 8.6% of patients in the CT-P10, US-RTX, and EU-RTX groups, respectively. CT-P10 and rituximab displayed similar pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic, and safety profiles., Conclusion: CT-P10 was similar to EU-RTX and US-RTX in terms of efficacy, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, immunogenicity, and safety up to week 48. CLINICALTRIALS., Gov Identifier: NCT02149121.

This multinational, randomized, double-blind trial, (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02149121) was designed to demonstrate equivalence in pharmacokinetics and efficacy between CT-P10 and innovator rituximab (RTX) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Adults with active RA were treated with CT-P10, United States-sourced RTX (US-RTX; Rituxan®), or European Union-sourced RTX (EU-RTX; MabThera®) at weeks 0 and 2. The co-primary pharmacokinetic endpoints were area under the serum concentration-time curve (AUC) from time zero to last measurable concentration (AUC 0-last ), AUC from time zero to infinity (AUC 0-∞ ), and maximum concentration (C max ) after two infusions. The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline to week 24 in Disease Activity Score using 28 joints-C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP). Pharmacodynamics, immunogenicity, and safety were also assessed. 372 patients were randomly assigned to CT-P10 (n = 161) or RTX (n = 211 [US-RTX, n = 151; EU-RTX, n = 60]). For the co-primary pharmacokinetic endpoints, 90% confidence intervals (CI) for ratios of geometric means (CT-P10/US-RTX, CT-P10/EU-RTX or EU-RTX/US-RTX) all fell within the equivalence margin of 80-125%. Adjusted least squares (LS) mean (standard error) change from baseline in DAS28-CRP at week 24 was -2.13 (0.175) for CT-P10 and -2.09 (0.176) for RTX. The 95% CI (-0.29, 0.21) of the estimated treatment difference between CT-P10 and RTX (-0.04) was entirely within the efficacy equivalence margin of ±0.5. Pharmacodynamics, immunogenicity, and safety profiles were similar for CT-P10 and RTX. The pharmacokinetics of CT-P10, US-RTX, and EU-RTX were equivalent. CT-P10 and RTX were also equivalent in terms of efficacy and displayed similar pharmacodynamic, immunogenicity, and safety profiles up to week 24.

Introduction: Trastuzumab is a key drug in the neoadjuvant treatment of breast cancers that overexpress the human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2). Pathological complete response (pCR) is commonly used as an endpoint in neoadjuvant clinical trials of trastuzumab as evidence suggests it may be a surrogate for long-term survival. Several biosimilar candidates of originator or 'reference' trastuzumab are in development and have used pCR as a primary endpoint to assess therapeutic equivalence between treatments. The exact definition of pCR has varied across studies. Areas covered: Here we look at the clinical relevance of pCR and compare rates of total pCR (defined as ypT0/is ypN0) and breast pCR (defined as ypT0/is) in clinical trials of reference and biosimilar trastuzumab. Expert commentary: In order to evaluate the efficacy of neoadjuvant systemic therapies in a uniform way, standardization of trial endpoints is necessary. Future studies in HER2-positive breast cancer should include full assessment of the breast and lymph node basin before and after neoadjuvant systemic therapy, and the use of total pCR as the primary outcome.

Purpose: Access to trastuzumab, a valuable anti-cancer treatment, can be limited by cost. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the PK profiles of CT-P6, a biosimilar of trastuzumab, and US-licensed reference trastuzumab (Herceptin ® ) in healthy subjects. Secondary study aims included comparison of the safety and immunogenicity of CT-P6 and reference trastuzumab in these subjects., Methods: We performed a single-dose, randomised, double-blind, parallel group study (NCT02665637) comparing CT-P6 with reference trastuzumab (6 mg/kg, 90 min intravenous infusion) in 70 healthy adult males. Pharmacokinetics, safety and immunogenicity were evaluated up to 10 weeks post-dose. Primary endpoints were area under the serum concentration-time curve (AUC) from time 0 to infinity (AUC inf ); AUC from time 0 to last quantifiable concentration (AUC last ); and observed maximum serum concentration (C max ). The pre-determined equivalence criterion was a 90% confidence interval of 80-125% for ratios of geometric least squares (LS) means., Results: Equivalence of CT-P6 and reference trastuzumab was demonstrated. Ratios (CT-P6/reference trastuzumab) of geometric LS means (90% confidence interval) were: AUC inf 99.05 (93.00, 105.51); AUC last 99.30 (92.85, 106.20); C max 96.58 (90.93, 102.59). Safety profiles were similar; treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in ten subjects (28.6%) in the CT-P6 group and 11 (31.4%) in the reference trastuzumab group. No serious adverse events or deaths occurred. No subjects tested positive for anti-drug antibodies., Conclusions: These data add to the totality of evidence required to demonstrate biosimilarity. A phase III study of CT-P6-in which equivalent neoadjuvant efficacy to reference trastuzumab has been demonstrated-is ongoing.

Background: Studies in patients with rheumatoid arthritis have shown that the rituximab biosimilar CT-P10 (Celltrion, Incheon, South Korea) has equivalent efficacy and pharmacokinetics to rituximab. In this phase 3 study, we aimed to assess the non-inferior efficacy and pharmacokinetic equivalence of CT-P10 compared with rituximab, when used in combination with cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone (CVP) in patients with newly diagnosed advanced-stage follicular lymphoma., Methods: In this ongoing, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, active-controlled study, patients aged 18 years or older with Ann Arbor stage III-IV follicular lymphoma were assigned 1:1 to CVP plus intravenous infusions of 375 mg/m 2 CT-P10 or rituximab on day 1 of eight 21-day cycles. Randomisation was done by the investigators using an interactive web or voice response system and a computer-generated randomisation schedule, prepared by a clinical research organisation. Randomisation was balanced using permuted blocks and was stratified by country, gender, and Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index score (0-2 vs 3-5). Study teams from the sponsor and clinical research organisation, investigators, and patients were masked to treatment assignment. The study was divided into two parts: part 1 assessing equivalence of pharmacokinetics (in the pharmacokinetics subset), and part 2 assessing efficacy in all randomised patients (patients from the pharmacokinetics subset plus additional patients enrolled in part 2). Equivalence of pharmacokinetics was shown if the 90% CIs for the geometric mean ratio of CT-P10 to rituximab in AUCτ and C maxSS were within the bounds of the equivalence margin of 80% and 125%. Non-inferiority of response was shown if the one-sided 97·5% CI lay on the positive side of the -7% margin, using a one-sided test done at the 2·5% significance level. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients who had an overall response over eight cycles and was assessed in the efficacy population (all randomised patients). The primary pharmacokinetic endpoints were area under the serum concentration-time curve at steady state (AUCτ) and maximum serum concentration at steady state (C maxSS ) at cycle 4, assessed in the pharmokinetic population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02162771., Findings: Between July 28, 2014, and Dec 29, 2015, 140 patients were enrolled. Here we report data for the eight-cycle induction period, up to week 24. The proportion of patients with an overall response in the efficacy population was 64 (97·0%) of 66 patients in the CT-P10 treatment group and 63 (92·6%) of 68 patients in the rituximab treatment group (4·3%; one-sided 97·5% CI -4·25), which lay on the positive side of the predefined non-inferiority margin. The ratio of geometric least squares means (CT-P10/rituximab) was 102·25% (90% CI 94·05-111·17) for AUCτ and 100·67% (93·84-108·00) for C maxSS , with all CIs within the bioequivalence margin of 80-125%. Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported for 58 (83%) of 70 patients in the CT-P10 treatment group and 56 (80%) of 70 in the rituximab treatment group. The most common grade 3 or 4 treatment-emergent adverse event in each treatment group was neutropenia (grade 3, 15 [21%] of 70 patients in the CT-P10 group and seven [10%] of 70 patients in the rituximab group). The proportion of patients who experienced at least one treatment-emergent serious adverse event was 16 (23%) of 70 patients in the CT-P10 group and nine (13%) of 70 patients in the rituximab group., Interpretation: In this study, we show that CT-P10 exhibits non-inferior efficacy and pharmacokinetic equivalence to rituximab. The safety profile of CT-P10 was comparable to that of rituximab. CT-P10 might represent a new therapeutic option for advanced-stage follicular lymphoma., Funding: Celltrion, Inc., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: CT-P10 is a biosimilar candidate of innovator rituximab (RTX) that demonstrated a comparable clinical profile to RTX in a phase I randomized controlled trial (RCT) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01534884)., Objective: This open-label extension (OLE) study (NCT01873443) compared the efficacy and safety of CT-P10 in patients with RA who received CT-P10 from the outset (i.e., from the start of the RCT and also in the OLE; 'maintenance group') with those who received RTX during the RCT and switched to CT-P10 during the OLE ('switch group')., Methods: Patients who completed the RCT were recruited. Based on the Disease Activity Score using 28 joints (DAS28) and predefined safety criteria, patients could receive up to two courses of CT-P10 during the OLE. Efficacy [DAS28 and European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) response], safety and immunogenicity were assessed., Results: Eighty-seven patients were enrolled; 58 and 29 had previously received CT-P10 or RTX, respectively, in the RCT. Of these, 38 (65.5%) and 20 (69.0%) were treated with CT-P10 in the OLE and therefore comprised the maintenance and switch groups, respectively. The mean change in DAS28-erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) from baseline (week 0 of RCT) at week 24 of the first OLE treatment course in the maintenance and switch groups was -2.7 and -2.4, respectively. The proportion of patients with good/moderate EULAR responses was also comparable between groups. Antidrug antibodies were detected in 13.2 and 15.0% of patients in the maintenance and switch groups, respectively, at week 24 of the first OLE course. CT-P10 treatment was well-tolerated when administered for up to 2 years or after switching from RTX., Conclusion: In this study population, comparable efficacy and safety profiles were observed in patients who switched from RTX to CT-P10 and those maintained on CT-P10 throughout treatment.

Background: CT-P10 is a biosimilar of innovator rituximab (RTX), a biological therapy used to treat patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who have responded inadequately to anti-tumor necrosis factor agents., Objective: Our objective was to compare the clinical profile of CT-P10 versus RTX in patients with RA who received up to two courses of treatment and were followed for up to 72 weeks., Methods: In this multicenter double-blind phase I study, patients were randomized 2:1 to receive CT-P10 1000 mg or RTX 1000 mg at weeks 0 and 2. Based on disease activity, patients could receive a second course of treatment between weeks 24 and 48. Efficacy endpoints, including mean change from baseline in Disease Activity Score using 28 joints (DAS28), safety, immunogenicity, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics were evaluated., Results: In total, 154 patients were randomized to CT-P10 or RTX (n = 103 and 51, respectively); 137 (n = 92 and 45) completed the first course of treatment, of whom 83 (n = 60 and 23) were re-treated. Improvements from baseline in all efficacy endpoints were highly similar between the CT-P10 and RTX groups over both treatment courses. At week 24 after the second course, mean change from week 0 of the first course in DAS28 erythrocyte sedimentation rate was -2.47 and -2.04 for CT-P10 and RTX, respectively, (p = 0.1866) and in DAS28 C-reactive protein was -2.32 and -2.00, respectively (p = 0.3268). The proportion of patients positive for antidrug antibodies at week 24 after the second treatment course was 20.0% and 21.7% in the CT-P10 and RTX groups, respectively. The safety profile of CT-P10 was comparable to that of RTX, and pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties were similar., Conclusions: In patients with RA, efficacy, safety, and other clinical data were comparable between CT-P10 and RTX after up to two courses of treatment over 72 weeks. (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01534884).

Objective: To compare the pharmacokinetics (PK), safety and tolerability of biosimilar infliximab (CT-P13 [Remsima(®), Inflectra(®)]) with two formulations of the reference medicinal product (RMP) (Remicade(®)) from either Europe (EU-RMP) or the USA (US-RMP)., Methods: This was a double-blind, three-arm, parallel-group study (EudraCT number: 2013-003173-10). Healthy subjects received single doses (5 mg/kg) of CT-P13 (n = 71), EU-RMP (n = 71) or US-RMP (n = 71). The primary objective was to compare the PK profiles for the three formulations. Assessments of comparative safety and tolerability were secondary objectives., Results: Baseline demographics were well balanced across the three groups. Primary end points (Cmax, AUClast and AUCinf) were equivalent between all formulations (CT-P13 vs EU-RMP; CT-P13 vs US-RMP; EU-RMP vs US-RMP). All other PK end points supported the high similarity of the three treatments. Tolerability profiles of the formulations were similar., Conclusion: The PK profile of CT-P13 is highly similar to EU-RMP and US-RMP. All three formulations were equally well tolerated.

Objective: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of CT-P13 (Remsima(®)) in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in South Korea., Methods: This post-marketing study included patients with active moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease (CD), fistulizing CD (FCD), or moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis (UC) treated with CT-P13 and followed for 30 weeks. Assessments included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and disease-specific clinical response and remission., Results: No unexpected TEAEs were observed in the 173 patients recruited to date. TEAEs occurred in 18.1, 16.7, and 26.9% of CD, FCD, and UC patients, respectively. Treatment-related TEAEs occurred in 10% of patients and were mostly mild-moderate in severity. There were five serious TEAEs (two infusion-related reactions, two infections, one abdominal pain) and no cases of malignancy, pneumonia, or death. Positive outcomes for response/remission were reported regardless of whether patients had received prior infliximab or not., Conclusion: CT-P13 was well tolerated and efficacious in patients with IBD.