Search

Background: Approval of the adalimumab (ADA) biosimilar ABP 501 for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) indications was based on the principle of extrapolation, without indication-specific clinical trial data. Objectives: To evaluate the real-world treatment patterns of ABP 501 in patients with IBD. Design: Retrospective analysis of pharmacy claims data from Germany and France. Methods: Continuously insured adult IBD patients who initiated ABP 501 between October 2018 and March 2020 were included. Treatment persistence, adherence, and post-ABP 501 switching patterns were evaluated for two mutually exclusive groups: ADA-naïve patients (i.e. no baseline use of ADA products) and ADA-experienced patients (i.e. previously treated with ADA products). Results: A total of 3362 German patients and 733 French patients were included, with 54.4% and 65.3% being ADA-naïve patients, respectively. Median persistence (95% CI) on ABP 501 was 10.9 months (9.8–11.6) in ADA-naïve patients and 14.2 months (12.7–15.2) in ADA-experienced patients in Germany; for the French cohort, ADA-naïve and -experienced patients had median persistence of 12.8 months (10.2–14.7) and 11.5 months (8.8–14.4), respectively. During the first 12 months of ABP 501 initiation, 53.7% of German patients and 51.0% of French patients were adherent to the therapy. About 20% of patients in both countries switched from ABP 501 to another targeted therapy. In the German cohort, ADA-naïve patients most frequently switched to non-tumor necrosis factor inhibitor biologics, but ADA-experienced patients most commonly switched to reference product (RP); in the French cohort, patients most often switched to RP regardless of prior exposure to ADA products. Conclusion: About 50% of patients persisted on and were adherent to ABP 501 therapy during the first 12 months after treatment initiation in two large European countries. Post-ABP 501, switching patterns varied between countries, indicating diversified treatment practices warranting further research on reason(s) for switching and potential overall treatment outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Pharmacoeconomic studies examining the cost-effectiveness of adalimumab biosimilars versus methotrexate in real-life settings are limited. Objectives To assess the cost per responder from the perspective of the National Health System of adalimumab biosimilars versus methotrexate for psoriasis treatment in a real-life setting. Methods A cost-per responder analysis comparing adalimumab biosimilars MSB11022 (Idacio®) and ABP 501 (Amgevita) versus subcutaneous methotrexate was performed. The incremental cost per responder was calculated by multiplying the cost of treatment (including the discounts, as published in the framework agreement of the Veneto region) and the number needed to treat each therapy. The clinical efficacy measures were defined as being on treatment (i.e., retention rate) at weeks 24 and 52. Results A total of 712 adult patients with moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis consecutively admitted to the outpatient clinic from January 2021 to December 2022 were included; 160 were treated with ABP 501 (Amgevita), 250 with MSB11022 (Idacio) and 302 with methotrexate. The retention rates of Amgevita, Idacio and methotrexate at week 24 were 86%, 90% and 78%, and 81%, 82% and 63% at week 52, respectively. The cost per responder at week 24 was €674 for Amgevita, €366 for Idacio and €264 for methotrexate, respectively; at week 52, was €1430 for Amgevita® €799 for Idacio® and €652 for methotrexate, respectively. Conclusions The real-life cost-effectiveness of biosimilar drugs is largely influenced by discount rates. The week 52 cost-effectiveness of Idacio is comparable to subcutaneous methotrexate. The lowering of the cost of biosimilar drugs makes them a more accessible therapeutic option and they also can be introduced earlier in the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis.

Objective: Adalimumab (ADA) is an effective treatment for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), both ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD). The equal effect between the original ADA and biosimilars from Europe and the United States has been shown. However, the biosimilar of ADA is different in China. The effectiveness and safety data of ADA biosimilar (HS016) in China have yet to be discovered. Patients and methods: 91 patients (75 CD, 16 UC) received HS016 treatment and were enrolled in this study. Therapeutic response and safety profiles were analyzed. Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) was also carried out among nonresponse patients. After being considered as "nonresponse" (after three or 6 months of treatment), 20 patients' serum TNFα concentrations were measured and correlated to their disease severity. Results: Among active CD patients (n = 61), 75.4% (46/61) at 12 w, 73.8% (45/61) at 26 w, 50.8% (31/61) at 52 w achieved the clinical response, respectively; 55.7% (34/61) at 12 w, 65.6% (40/61) at 26 w, and 45.9% (28/61) at 52 w achieved clinical remission. The maintained remission rates of CD (n = 14) in clinical remission were 100% (14/14) at 12 w, 78.6% (11/14) at 26 w, and 63.6% (7/11) at 52 w, respectively. Among active UC patients, 37.5% (6/16) at 12 w and 50% (8/16) at 26 w achieved clinical response. Total adverse event rates were 5.5% (5/91) during 52-week visits. Due to the inadequate serum drug concentration, 30.4% (7/23) of patients had poor clinical responses. Elevations of serum anti-drug antibodies occurred in one additional patient (4.3%). Conclusion: ADA biosimilar HS016 had good efficacy and safety in Chinese IBD patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Relapsing polychondritis (RP) is a rare autoimmune disease characterized by inflammation of the cartilage structures of the body with typical features of auricular chondritis, nasal and ocular inflammation, audio-vestibular damage, as well as respiratory tract manifestations. It is associated with several autoimmune diseases and many other disorders. Tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFα) inhibitors treat many chronic inflammatory disorders. They have proven effective and relatively safe in many clinical trials and observational studies. However, several autoimmune phenomena and paradoxical inflammation have been described with TNFα inhibitors, among them RP. This report presents a 43-year-old man with psoriatic arthritis treated with ABP-501 (Amgevita), an adalimumab (ADA) biosimilar and who developed RP, 8 months after the initiation of the treatment. This, is the first report of RP development during TNFα inhibitors biosimilar. We concluded that rheumatologists dealing with patients treated with TNFα inhibitors (originators or biosimilars), should be aware of several paradoxical reactions which may emerge and RP, is one of them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Pharmacoeconomic studies examining the cost-effectiveness of adalimumab biosimilars versus methotrexate in real-life settings are limited. To assess the cost per responder from the perspective of the National Health System of adalimumab biosimilars versus methotrexate for psoriasis treatment in a real-life setting. A cost-per responder analysis comparing adalimumab biosimilars MSB11022 (Idacio®) and ABP 501 (Amgevita) versus subcutaneous methotrexate was performed. The incremental cost per responder was calculated by multiplying the cost of treatment (including the discounts, as published in the framework agreement of the Veneto region) and the number needed to treat each therapy. The clinical efficacy measures were defined as being on treatment (i.e., retention rate) at weeks 24 and 52. A total of 712 adult patients with moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis consecutively admitted to the outpatient clinic from January 2021 to December 2022 were included; 160 were treated with ABP 501 (Amgevita), 250 with MSB11022 (Idacio) and 302 with methotrexate. The retention rates of Amgevita, Idacio and methotrexate at week 24 were 86%, 90% and 78%, and 81%, 82% and 63% at week 52, respectively. The cost per responder at week 24 was €674 for Amgevita, €366 for Idacio and €264 for methotrexate, respectively; at week 52, was €1430 for Amgevita® €799 for Idacio® and €652 for methotrexate, respectively. The real-life cost-effectiveness of biosimilar drugs is largely influenced by discount rates. The week 52 cost-effectiveness of Idacio is comparable to subcutaneous methotrexate. The lowering of the cost of biosimilar drugs makes them a more accessible therapeutic option and they also can be introduced earlier in the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: To support an interchangeability designation for Sandoz adalimumab biosimilar (GP2017), antidrug antibody (ADA) signal-to-noise (S/N) ratios were assessed in the GP2017 ADACCESS trial to directly assess potential changes in immunogenicity., Research Design and Methods: ADACCESS was a 51-week trial in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis that included patients treated continuously with reference adalimumab (cH), and patients who experienced four switches between reference adalimumab and GP2017 (H2H). ADAs were measured every 6 weeks during the switching phase using an electrochemiluminescence assay. A non-parametric analysis was performed to estimate the 90% confidence interval (CI) of the median of difference in ADA S/N ratios between the cH and H2H treatment groups at week 41. If the 90% CI was within the margin of -0.16 to 0.16 (representing assay noise), this was considered a non-clinically meaningful difference in immunogenicity., Results: The 90% CIs of the median of difference in ADA S/N ratios between the two treatment groups were within the defined margin of -0.16 to 0.16 at week 41, and at all other time points. Efficacy and safety data were also similar between the treatment groups., Conclusion: Analysis of ADA S/N ratios showed no increase in immunogenicity following up to four switches between reference adalimumab and GP2017., Trial Registration: NCT02016105.

This study aimed to compare adalimumab originator vs. biosimilar in HS patients, and to evaluate the effect of a switch to a biosimilar, or a switch back to the originator, in terms of treatment ineffectiveness. Patients with a diagnosis of HS were enrolled from 14 Italian sites. Treatment ineffectiveness was measured using Hurley score. The major analyses were 1) comparison between the two treatment groups (non-switcher analysis), and 2) the cross-over trend of Hurley score between treatment switchers (switcher analysis). Cox and Poisson regression models were used to compare the treatment ineffectiveness between groups. A total of 326 patients were divided into four groups: 171 (52.5%) taking originator; 61 (18.7%) patients taking biosimilar; 66 (20.2%) switchers; 28 (8.6%) switchers from originator to biosimilar and switched. A greater loss of efficacy was observed in the group allocated to the biosimilar than the originator group. The switcher analysis showed an effectiveness loss in the biosimilar compared to the originator. These results seem to indicate that a switch from one drug to the other may lead to a greater risk of inefficacy. A return to the previous treatment also does not ensure efficaciousness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

LBAL was developed as an adalimumab (Humira®) biosimilar using Chinese hamster ovary cell lines. Comparable quality, safety, and efficacy between a biosimilar and its reference product should be ensured for regulatory approval. Here, we present the results of a comprehensive physicochemical and biological characterization between LBAL and Humira®. As physicochemical attributes, primary and higher-order structure, N-glycan profile, and disulfide linkage were investigated. Biological attributes were evaluated by target/receptor binding analysis and in vitro/ex vivo cell-based assays, which are linked to mechanisms of action. As a result, LBAL had the identical amino acid sequence, similar post-translational modifications and N-/C-terminal variants, and comparable primary, secondary, and tertiary structures and disulfide linkage profile. However, some differences in N-glycan profiles were observed. Biological activities, including tumor necrosis factor (TNF) binding, TNF-neutralization, apoptosis, Fc receptor binding, and complement-dependent cytotoxicity, were largely consistent. Despite a slightly lower antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity activity in LBAL, this difference was not significant under physiological conditions. As indicated, this extensive analytical characterization and functional comparison assessment showed that LBAL was similar to Humira®, with minor differences of no clinical relevance. Taken together, our comparative assessment of physicochemical and biological attributes demonstrated that LBAL is structurally and functionally very similar to Humira®, supporting the biosimilarity of clinical efficacy and safety.

This study aimed to compare adalimumab originator vs. biosimilar in HS patients, and to evaluate the effect of a switch to a biosimilar, or a switch back to the originator, in terms of treatment ineffectiveness. Patients with a diagnosis of HS were enrolled from 14 Italian sites. Treatment ineffectiveness was measured using Hurley score. The major analyses were 1) comparison between the two treatment groups (non-switcher analysis), and 2) the cross-over trend of Hurley score between treatment switchers (switcher analysis). Cox and Poisson regression models were used to compare the treatment ineffectiveness between groups. A total of 326 patients were divided into four groups: 171 (52.5%) taking originator; 61 (18.7%) patients taking biosimilar; 66 (20.2%) switchers; 28 (8.6%) switchers from originator to biosimilar and switched. A greater loss of efficacy was observed in the group allocated to the biosimilar than the originator group. The switcher analysis showed an effectiveness loss in the biosimilar compared to the originator. These results seem to indicate that a switch from one drug to the other may lead to a greater risk of inefficacy. A return to the previous treatment also does not ensure efficaciousness.

LBAL was developed as an adalimumab (Humira®) biosimilar using Chinese hamster ovary cell lines. Comparable quality, safety, and efficacy between a biosimilar and its reference product should be ensured for regulatory approval. Here, we present the results of a comprehensive physicochemical and biological characterization between LBAL and Humira®. As physicochemical attributes, primary and higher-order structure, N-glycan profile, and disulfide linkage were investigated. Biological attributes were evaluated by target/receptor binding analysis and in vitro/ex vivo cell-based assays, which are linked to mechanisms of action. As a result, LBAL had the identical amino acid sequence, similar post-translational modifications and N-/C-terminal variants, and comparable primary, secondary, and tertiary structures and disulfide linkage profile. However, some differences in N-glycan profiles were observed. Biological activities, including tumor necrosis factor (TNF) binding, TNF-neutralization, apoptosis, Fc receptor binding, and complement-dependent cytotoxicity, were largely consistent. Despite a slightly lower antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity activity in LBAL, this difference was not significant under physiological conditions. As indicated, this extensive analytical characterization and functional comparison assessment showed that LBAL was similar to Humira®, with minor differences of no clinical relevance. Taken together, our comparative assessment of physicochemical and biological attributes demonstrated that LBAL is structurally and functionally very similar to Humira®, supporting the biosimilarity of clinical efficacy and safety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Quality by design (QbD) is an efficient but challenging approach for the development of biosimilar due to the complex relationship among process, quality, and efficacy. Here, the analytical similarity of adalimumab biosimilar HLX03 to Humira® was successfully established following a QbD quality study. Quality target product profile (QTPP) of HLX03 was first generated according to the public available information and initial characterization of 3 batches of Humira®. The critical quality attributes (CQAs) were then identified through risk assessment according to impact of each quality attribute on efficacy and safety. The anticipated range for each CQA was derived from similarity acceptance range and/or the corresponding regulatory guidelines. Finally, a panel of advanced and orthogonal physicochemical and functional tests and comparison of 6 batches of HLX03 and 10 batches of the reference standard demonstrated high similarity of HLX03 to Humira®, except for slightly lower percentage of high mannosylated glycans (%HM) in HLX03 which had no effect on FcγRIII binding and antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity (ADCC) activity in human peripheral blood mononuclear cell (PBMC). All above demonstrated the feasibility and efficiency of QbD-based similarity assessment of a biosimilar monoclonal antibody (mAb). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background/AimsData on the efficacy and safety of the adalimumab biosimilar Exemptia are limited.MethodsPatients with moderate-to-severe active steroid-refractory ulcerative colitis (UC) treated at Dayanand Medical College and Hospital, India were offered cyclosporine A, biologicals or biosimilars, or surgery. A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients who were treated with the adalimumab biosimilar, Exemptia. These patients were administered an induction dosing schedule of 160 mg Exemptia at week 0, 80 mg at week 2, and then 40 mg every other week from week 4 to 8. The clinical response and remission were assessed at week 8 using Mayo score.ResultsA total of 29 patients (62.1% male; mean age, 34.9 ± 9.7 years) with moderate-to-severe steroid-refractory active UC (mean disease duration, 6.3±5.1 years; pancolitis in 9 patients [31.1%]; left-sided colitis in 20 patients [68.9%]) were treated with the Exemptia induction dosing schedule. The mean Mayo score at presentation was 8.2±1.4. At week 8, clinical response was observed in 7 patients (24.1%), whereas clinical remission was observed only in 1 patient (3.5%). Among the non-responders (n=21), 4 patients required colectomy, 1 died, 1 was lost to follow-up, 10 were offered fecal microbiota transplant, 3 were administered infliximab, and 2 patients were administered cyclosporine and tacrolimus, respectively. Four patients (13.8%) developed extrapulmonary tuberculosis.ConclusionsThe adalimumab biosimilar Exemptia has limited efficacy for the attainment of clinical response and remission in moderate-to-severe steroid-refractory UC, with a significant risk of acquisition or reactivation of tuberculosis in developing countries such as India.

Background: Tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFα) is a pivotal cytokine involved in the pathogenesis of certain inflammatory diseases, such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA), spondyloarthropathies, and inflammatory bowel diseases. In the last two decades, TNFα inhibitors (TNFi) have revolutionized the treatment and outcome of the above disorders. However, the use of TNFi has been associated with the development of many autoimmune phenomena and paradoxical skin manifestations that may present as the same type of clinical indications for which the TNFi effectively used. Thus, they may display as arthritis, uveitis, colitis, psoriasis, and several other cutaneous clinical manifestations, among them the development of morphea, a localized scleroderma skin lesion., Case Presentation: We describe a 58-year-old woman with seronegative RA, refractory to methotrexate, who was treated with ABP-501 (Hefiya), an adalimumab (ADA) biosimilar and developed an oval-shaped, deep skin lesion of approximately 3.5cm in size, affecting the left part of her back compatible with morphea 3 months after the initiation of therapy. ADA biosimilar was discontinued and two months later, she had substantial skin improvement., Conclusion: This is the first report of morphea manifestation during TNFi biosimilar since the patient had no other trigger factors for morphea development like trauma and infections. Physicians dealing with patients treated with TNFi biosimilars should be aware of paradoxical skin reactions, among them morphea; thus, close monitoring, a minute and careful clinical examination, and a follow- up check are required., (Copyright© Bentham Science Publishers; For any queries, please email at epub@benthamscience.net.)

Immunogenicity against biologic medicines is ubiquitous, and it is traditionally measured by the final humoral response. However, the onset of a sustained immunogenic response begins at the cellular level with activation of T cells and maturation of naïve B cells into plasma cells. Ex vivo comparative immunogenicity assessment (EVCIA) of cellular immunogenicity in participants with moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis in the AVT02-GL-302 study, who received either reference product (RP) alone (non-switching arm) or switched between RP and AVT02 (switching arm) after 1:1 randomization at week 12. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) were collected and cryopreserved from 28 participants at: baseline (before treatment) (week 1); pre-randomization (week 12); and week 16 and week 28 in both switching and non-switching arms. PBMCs were thawed and re-exposed to either medium alone (negative control), RP, AVT02, keyhole limpet hemocyanin (KLH) (positive control), RP+KLH, or AVT02+KLH. Samples from 10 participants (predetermined average cell viability of 75% across all timepoints) from each arm were analyzed for cytokine release after 24 hours and for Th-cell proliferation, 6 days post-seeding. Until week 28, cytokine release and Th-cell proliferation was similar at all time points in both switching and non-switching arms. Overall cellular immune response was elevated post-KLH re-exposure at all timepoints. The comparable ex vivo cellular immunogenicity between switching and non-switching arms complements the confirmation of interchangeability in the main study. Given the sensitivity of novel EVCIA, detecting cellular immunogenicity could be a potential outcome in predicting the immunogenicity of biologic medicines., Competing Interests: K.R., H.N.H., and F.B. are employees of Alvotech. E.G. was an employee of Alvotech at the time of the study. J.S. and A.M. are employees of ImmunXperts. N.R. has received consultancy fees in relation to this study and in other studies conducted by Alvotech, but no consultancy fees have been received in relation to the writing of this manuscript., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Immunology.)

Background/Aims: Data on the efficacy and safety of the adalimumab biosimilar Exemptia are limited. Methods: Patients with moderate-to-severe active steroid-refractory ulcerative colitis (UC) treated at Dayanand Medical College and Hospital, India were offered cyclosporine A, biologicals or biosimilars, or surgery. A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients who were treated with the adalimumab biosimilar, Exemptia. These patients were administered an induction dosing schedule of 160 mg Exemptia at week 0, 80 mg at week 2, and then 40 mg every other week from week 4 to 8. The clinical response and remission were assessed at week 8 using Mayo score. Results: A total of 29 patients (62.1% male; mean age, 34.9 ± 9.7 years) with moderate-to-severe steroid-refractory active UC (mean disease duration, 6.3±5.1 years; pancolitis in 9 patients [31.1%]; left-sided colitis in 20 patients [68.9%]) were treated with the Exemptia induction dosing schedule. The mean Mayo score at presentation was 8.2±1.4. At week 8, clinical response was observed in 7 patients (24.1%), whereas clinical remission was observed only in 1 patient (3.5%). Among the non-responders (n=21), 4 patients required colectomy, 1 died, 1 was lost to followup, 10 were offered fecal microbiota transplant, 3 were administered infliximab, and 2 patients were administered cyclosporine and tacrolimus, respectively. Four patients (13.8%) developed extrapulmonary tuberculosis. Conclusions: The adalimumab biosimilar Exemptia has limited efficacy for the attainment of clinical response and remission in moderate-to-severe steroidrefractory UC, with a significant risk of acquisition or reactivation of tuberculosis in developing countries such as India. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Infliximab and adalimumab biosimilars have been approved by the FDA and European Medicines Agency and have already been introduced to the international market. Availability into the US market is imminent. Biosimilars are highly similar to the reference biologic product but should not be referred to as, nor equated with, generic medications as no two biosimilars can ever be identical. Regulatory pathways for biosimilar approval consider the totality of evidence for biosimilar approvals, but the preponderance of development relies on analytic and functional testing and allows extrapolation between indications to reduce the financial burden of completing comparative clinical trials for each indication. Neither CT-P13 (infliximab biosimilar) nor ABP 501 (adalimumab biosimilar) was clinically tested in patients with inflammatory bowel disease prior to being submitted for approval by regulatory agencies. The body of available evidence suggests that these drugs will perform similarly to their originators. The pathway for interchangeability of biosimilars has yet to be clarified by federal regulators and currently remains determined by states within the USA. However, preliminary data suggests that switching from originator to biosimilar is safe with minimal differences in clinical efficacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Biosimilars can reduce healthcare costs and expand patient access to biologic therapies. Currently, eight adalimumab biosimilars have received regulatory approval from the EMA and/or the US FDA. Following recent EMA approval of the first high-concentration adalimumab biosimilar, CT-P17, this review provides a contemporary update on adalimumab biosimilars currently licensed in Europe and the USA. The totality of evidence from each clinical development program is summarized, and characteristics of each formulation and/or device that potentially affect the convenience of treatment for patients are discussed. Future perspectives are considered, including the potential impact of the FDA's first interchangeability designation for an adalimumab biosimilar, ahead of their entry into the US marketplace in 2023.

Biologic compounds are obtained from living organisms or cell cultures by means of biotechnology methods. A similar biologic drug, commonly called biosimilar, is a product copied by a native approved biologic drug whose license has expired. Biosimilar drugs usually are marketed at a lower price and provide important financial savings for public healthcare systems. Some differences between biosimilars and original biologic drugs might exist but they are acceptable if they fall within defined "boundaries of tolerance": differences in some features between the two molecules are considered important only if clinical relevant. Considering that the efficacy of the innovator biologic drug has already been established, the clinical studies required for approval of a biosimilar could be reduced compared with those required for the approval of the originator. In this review, real life data available in inflammatory bowel disease patients treated with biosimilars are reported, documenting in general satisfactory outcomes, sustained efficacy and no sign of increased immunogenicity, although, further controlled data are awaited., Competing Interests: Conflict-of-interest statement: No potential conflicts of interest relevant to this article were reported.