Search

Aim: To assess the safety and tolerability of subcutaneous (SC) trastuzumab (Herceptin) administered either with a single-use injection device (SID) or manually from a vial using a hand-held syringe., Methods: The ESCAPE trial (NCT02194166) included 90 women aged 18 years or older with HER2-positive early breast cancer who underwent surgical treatment and completed (neo) adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy (if indicated). Patients enrolled in the study were first subjected to 4 cycles of trastuzumab IV (8 mg/kg loading dose followed by 6 mg/kg maintenance dose, q3w) prior to being randomized into groups: [A] SC trastuzumab (fixed dose 600 mg, q3w) administered through a hand-held syringe followed by 7 cycles of SC trastuzumab administered with an SID or [B] the reverse sequence., Results: Patient-reported outcomes revealed that 78 (94.0 % [95 % CI: 90.4-99.0]) out of 83 patients preferred SC trastuzumab over IV trastuzumab, among whom 28 patients indicated a strong preference. Sixteen out of 17 HCPs (94.1 %) were very satisfied with the use of SC trastuzumab, while 1/17 (5.9 %) remained uncertain. The mean time spent for IV vs. SC trastuzumab administration, including pre- and postinjection procedures, was 93.8 and 22 min, respectively. A total of 49 (54.4 %) patients reported 164 AEs., Conclusions: In this trial, SC trastuzumab was preferred over IV trastuzumab. The duration of SC trastuzumab administration was significantly shorter than that of IV trastuzumab, saving patients and HCPs time. Safety and efficacy results were consistent with other published trials and were not associated with any new safety signal., 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 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: This double-blind, parallel-group, active-controlled phase III trial (NCT02260804) assessed CT-P10 and rituximab safety and efficacy in patients with previously untreated low-tumor-burden follicular lymphoma (LTBFL), including after a single switch from rituximab to CT-P10., Patients and Methods: LTBFL patients were randomized (1:1) to receive CT-P10 or rituximab (375 mg/m 2 intravenously; day 1 of 4 7-day cycles). Patients achieving disease control entered a 2-year maintenance period. CT-P10 or rituximab were administered every 8 weeks (6 cycles) in year 1; all patients could receive CT-P10 (every 8 weeks; 6 cycles) in year 2. Secondary endpoints (reported here) were overall response rate (ORR) during the study period, progression-free survival (PFS), time to progression (TTP), and overall survival (OS). Safety and immunogenicity were evaluated., Results: Between  November 9, 2015 and  January 4, 2018, 258 patients were randomized (130 for CT-P10; 128 for rituximab). ORR was similar between groups over the study period (CT-P10: 88%; rituximab: 87%). After 29.2 months' median follow-up, median PFS, TTP, and OS were not estimable; 24-month Kaplan-Meier estimates suggested similarity between groups. Overall, 114 (CT-P10: 88%), and 104 (rituximab: 81%) patients experienced treatment-emergent adverse events. The single switch was well tolerated., Conclusion: These updated data support therapeutic similarity of CT-P10 and rituximab and support the use of CT-P10 monotherapy for previously untreated LTBFL., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Rituximab biosimilars are a cornerstone of treatment of advanced-stage follicular lymphoma (FL). This double-blind, parallel-group, phase 3 trial randomized (1:1) adults (≥18 years) with stage III to IV indolent B-cell lymphoma, including grades 1 to 3a FL, to receive CT-P10 or rituximab (375 mg/m2 IV), with cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone, every 3 weeks for 8 cycles (induction period). Patients achieving complete response (CR), unconfirmed CR, or partial response (PR) received CT-P10 or rituximab maintenance for 2 years (375 mg/m2, every 8 weeks). Primary end points were previously reported, proving noninferiority of efficacy and pharmacokinetic equivalence of CT-P10 to rituximab. Secondary end points included overall response rate (PR+CR) during the induction period per 2007 International Working Group (IWG) criteria, survival analyses, and overall safety. Between 28 July 2014 and 29 December 2015, 140 patients were randomized (70 per group). Median follow-up was 39.9 months (interquartile range, 36.7-43.5). Per 1999 IWG criteria, 4-year Kaplan-Meier estimates (95% confidence interval [CI]) for CT-P10 and rituximab were 61% (47% to 73%) and 55% (36% to 70%) for progression-free survival (hazard ratio, 1.33 [95% CI, 0.67-2.63]; P=.409), respectively, and 88% (77% to 94%) and 93% (83% to 97%) for overall survival (5.29 [0.84-33.53]; P=.077). Overall, 90% (CT-P10) and 86% (rituximab) of patients experienced treatment-emergent adverse events. Long-term safety profiles were similar between groups. Findings confirm favorable outcomes for CT-P10-treated patients with advanced-stage FL and demonstrate comparable long-term efficacy and overall safety between CT-P10 and rituximab. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02162771., (© 2021 by The American Society of Hematology.)

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).)

Background: Bevacizumab is an antiangiogenic recombinant humanized monoclonal antibody that inhibits tumor growth. FKB238, a bevacizumab biosimilar, has analytical pharmacokinetic and safety profiles similar to those of bevacizumab., Objective: This phase III trial (NCT02810457) compared the efficacy and safety of FKB238 with that of bevacizumab in patients with advanced/recurrent non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (non-sq-NSCLC)., Methods: This global, multicenter, double-blind, parallel, randomized, comparative clinical trial enrolled and randomized patients with advanced/recurrent non-sq-NSCLC to receive intravenous infusions of either FKB238 15 mg/kg or bevacizumab 15 mg/kg. All patients received intravenous infusions of paclitaxel 200 mg/m 2 and carboplatin (area under the curve 6.0) immediately prior to investigational products for 4-6 cycles. FKB238 and bevacizumab were administered on day 1 of each 21-day cycle until objective progressive disease by RECIST version 1.1 or other discontinuation criteria were met. The primary efficacy endpoint was overall response rate (ORR), including complete and partial response and based on blinded independent central review assessment. Other efficacy determinations included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and immunogenicity. Adverse events and severity were reported., Results: The ORR for the intent-to-treat (ITT) population (N = 731) was 51.6% in the FKB238 arm (N = 364) and 53.7% in the bevacizumab arm (N = 367). The FKB238:bevacizumab ORR ratio (ITT population) was 0.96 (90% confidence interval [CI] 0.86-1.08), and the difference in ORR (per-protocol set) between FKB238 and bevacizumab was - 0.02 (95% CI - 0.09 to 0.06). Both CIs fell within the prespecified equivalence margins. Estimated median PFS was 7.72 and 7.62 months in the FKB238 and bevacizumab arms, respectively (hazard ratio 0.97; 95% CI 0.82-1.16). Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported for 94.2% and 95.1% of patients in the FKB238 and bevacizumab arms, respectively. Grade 3 or higher TEAEs were reported for 53.6% and 55.5% of patients in the FKB238 and bevacizumab arms, respectively. Serious TEAEs were reported for 25.1% and 26.0% of patients treated with FKB238 and bevacizumab, respectively., Conclusions: Efficacy equivalence was demonstrated between the two drugs, and safety profiles were similar. There were no meaningful differences in efficacy and safety between FKB238 or bevacizumab in patients with non-sq-NSCLC., Trial Registration Number: NCT02810457., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Objectives: To compare the diagnostic efficiency of whole-body MRI-DWI and PET/CT in lymphoma staging., Methods: A prospective study enrolled 92 patients with lymphoma. Prior to treatment, all patients underwent whole-body MRI-DWI and PET-CT. The methods' efficiency was compared in the diagnosis of lymph node (LN) and organ involvement, and in determining lymphoma stage., Results: Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy in the diagnosis of enlarged LN involvement were 98.2%, 99.9%, and 99.3%, respectively, for MRI-DWI, and 99.4%, 100.0%, and 99.8%, respectively, for PET/CT. ROC analysis showed similar methods' efficiency in the diagnosis of enlarged LN involvement (p > 0.06). MRI-DWI and PET/CT sensitivity in the diagnosis of non-enlarged LN involvement was 77.8% and 88.1%, respectively (p < 0.001). MRI-DWI and PET/CT sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy in the diagnosis of lung involvement were 73.3%, 98.7%, 94.6% and 86.7%, 98.7%, 96.7%; spleen involvement 54.8%, 98.3%, 83.3% and 100.0%, 100.0%, 100.0%; bone marrow involvement 87.1%, 96.4%, 93.0% and 64.5%, 87.3%, 79.1%; and all-organ involvement 72.9%, 98.1%, 91.4% and 80.0%, 96.6%, 92.2%, respectively. ROC analysis showed similar methods' efficiency in the diagnosis of lung involvement (р > 0.3), higher for PET/CT in spleen involvement (р < 0.0001), higher for MRI-DWI in bone marrow involvement (р < 0.0008), and similar in all-organ involvement (р > 0.35). MRI-DWI and PET/CT determined the correct lymphoma stage in 79 (86%) patients., Conclusions: Whole-body MRI-DWI and PET/CT determined the correct lymphoma stage in similar numbers of patients. MRI-DWI can serve as a non-irradiative alternative to PET/CT in lymphoma staging., Key Points: • Whole-body MRI-DWI efficiency compared with that of PET/CT is similar in the diagnosis of enlarged LN involvement, inferior in the diagnosis of non-enlarged LN and spleen involvement, but superior in the diagnosis of bone marrow involvement. • A new efficient MRI-DWI sign for diagnosis of diffuse bone marrow involvement has been proposed, i.e., a diffuse increase in spine signal intensity on high b value DWI images above the kidney parenchyma. • MRI-DWI and PET/CT determined the correct lymphoma stage in similar numbers of patients.

Background: In TAGS, an international, double-blind, phase 3 trial, trifluridine/tipiracil significantly improved overall survival and progression-free survival compared with placebo in heavily pretreated metastatic gastric cancer patients. This paper reports pre-specified quality of life (QoL) outcomes for TAGS., Methods: Patients were randomized 2:1 to trifluridine/tipiracil (35 mg/m 2 twice daily on days 1-5 and 8-12 of each 28-day cycle) plus best supportive care (BSC) or placebo plus BSC. QoL was evaluated at baseline and at each treatment cycle, using the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-STO22 questionnaires; results were considered valid for analysis only if ≥ 10% of patients completed the questionnaires. Key QoL outcomes were mean changes from baseline and time to deterioration in QoL. A post hoc analysis assessed the association between QoL and time to deterioration of Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score (ECOG PS) to ≥ 2., Results: Of 507 randomized patients, 496 had baseline QoL data available. The analysis cut-off was 6 cycles for trifluridine/tipiracil and 3 cycles for placebo. In both treatment groups, there were no clinically significant deteriorations in the mean QLQ-C30 Global Health Status (GHS) score, or in most subscale scores. In a sensitivity analysis including death and disease progression as events, there was a trend towards trifluridine/tipiracil reducing the risk of deterioration of QoL scores compared with placebo. Deterioration in the GHS score was associated with deterioration in ECOG PS., Conclusion: QoL was maintained in TAGS, and there was a trend towards trifluridine/tipiracil reducing the risk of QoL deterioration compared with placebo. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT02500043.

Importance: Trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) treatment has shown clinical benefit in patients with pretreated metastatic gastric cancer or gastroesophageal junction cancer (mGC/GEJC). Patients who have undergone gastrectomy constitute a significant proportion of patients with mGC/GEJC., Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of FTD/TPI among patients with previously treated mGC/GEJC who had or had not undergone gastrectomy., Design, Setting, and Participants: This preplanned subgroup analysis of TAGS (TAS-102 Gastric Study), a phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled, clinical trial included patients with mGC/GEJC who had received at least 2 previous chemotherapy regimens, and was conducted at 110 academic hospitals in 17 countries in Europe, Asia, and North America, with enrollment between February 24, 2016, and January 5, 2018; the data cutoff was March 31, 2018., Interventions: Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive oral FTD/TPI 35 mg/m2 twice daily or placebo twice daily with best supportive care on days 1 through 5 and days 8 through 12 of each 28-day treatment cycle., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was overall survival. This subgroup analysis was conducted to examine potential trends and was not powered for statistical significance. Efficacy and safety end points were evaluated in the subgroups., Results: Of 507 randomized patients (369 [72.8%] male; mean [SD] age, 62.5 [10.5] years), 221 (43.6%) had undergone gastrectomy (147 randomized to FTD/TPI and 74 to placebo) and 286 (56.4%) had not undergone gastrectomy (190 randomized to FTD/TPI and 96 to placebo). In the gastrectomy subgroup, the overall survival hazard ratio (HR) in the FTD/TPI group vs placebo group was 0.57 (95% CI, 0.41-0.79), and the progression-free survival HR was 0.48 (95% CI, 0.35-0.65). In the no gastrectomy subgroup, the overall survival HR in the FTD/TPI group vs placebo group was 0.80 (95% CI, 0.60-1.06), and the progression-free survival HR was 0.65 (95% CI, 0.49-0.85). Among FTD/TPI-treated patients, grade 3 or higher adverse events of any cause occurred in 122 of 145 patients (84.1%) in the gastrectomy subgroup and 145 of 190 (76.3%) in the no gastrectomy subgroup: 64 (44.1%) in the gastrectomy subgroup and 50 (26.3%) in the no gastrectomy subgroup had grade 3 or higher neutropenia, 31 (21.4%) in the gastrectomy subgroup and 33 (17.4%) in the no gastrectomy subgroup had grade 3 or higher anemia, and 21 (14.5%) in the gastrectomy subgroup and 10 (5.3%) in the no gastrectomy subgroup hD grade 3 or higher leukopenia. In the gastrectomy subgroup, 94 (64.8%) had dosing modifications because of adverse events vs 101 (53.2%) in the no gastrectomy subgroup; 15 (10.3%) in the gastrectomy group and 28 (14.7%) in the no gastrectomy group discontinued treatment because of adverse events. Treatment exposure was similar between groups., Conclusions and Relevance: The FTD/TPI treatment was tolerable and provided efficacy benefits among patients with pretreated mGC/GEJC regardless of previous gastrectomy., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02500043.

Purpose: Neoadjuvant CT-P6, a trastuzumab biosimilar, demonstrated equivalent efficacy to reference trastuzumab in a phase 3 trial of HER2-positive early-stage breast cancer (EBC) (NCT02162667). We report post hoc analyses evaluating pathological complete response (pCR) and breast pCR alongside additional efficacy and safety measures., Methods: Following neoadjuvant treatment and surgery, patients received adjuvant CT-P6 or trastuzumab (6 mg/kg) every 3 weeks for ≤ 1 year., Results: In total, 271 and 278 patients received CT-P6 and trastuzumab, respectively. pCR and breast pCR rates were comparable between treatment groups regardless of age, region, or clinical stage. Overall, 47.6% (CT-P6) and 52.2% (trastuzumab) of patients experienced study drug-related treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), including 17 patients reporting heart failure (CT-P6: 10; trastuzumab: 7). Two CT-P6 and three trastuzumab patients discontinued adjuvant treatment due to TEAEs., Conclusion: Adjuvant CT-P6 demonstrated comparable efficacy and safety to trastuzumab at 1 year in patients with HER2-positive EBC, supporting CT-P6 and trastuzumab comparability.

Background: Trifluridine/tipiracil showed activity and was well tolerated in a phase 2 study of pretreated patients with advanced gastric cancer done in Japan. We investigated whether the treatment was efficacious compared with placebo in a global population., Methods: TAGS was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial done in 110 academic hospitals in 17 countries. Patients aged 18 years or older with histologically confirmed, non-resectable, metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma (including adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction) as defined by the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging classification (7th edition) who had received at least two previous chemotherapy regimens and had experienced radiological disease progression were eligible for inclusion. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) via dynamic randomisation from a centralised interactive voice-response system to receive either oral trifluridine/tipiracil (35 mg/m 2 twice daily on days 1-5 and days 8-12 every 28 days) plus best supportive care or placebo plus best supportive care. Participants were allocated to groups by study-site personnel. Randomisation was stratified by region (Japan vs rest of world), ECOG performance status (0 vs 1), and previous treatment with ramucirumab (yes vs no). Both patients and investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Efficacy was assessed in the intention-to-treat population and safety in all patients who received at least one dose of treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02500043. The trial, including follow-up of all participants, has been completed., Findings: Between Feb 24, 2016, and Jan 5, 2018, 507 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned, 337 to the trifluridine/tipiracil group and 170 to the placebo group. Median overall survival was 5·7 months (95% CI 4·8-6·2) in the trifluridine/tipiracil group and 3·6 months (3·1-4·1) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·69 [95% CI 0·56-0·85]; one-sided p=0·00029, two-sided p=0·00058). Grade 3 or worse adverse events of any cause occurred in 267 (80%) patients in the trifluridine/tipiracil group and 97 (58%) in the placebo group. The most frequent grade 3 or worse adverse events of any cause were neutropenia (n=114 [34%]) and anaemia (n=64 [19%]) in the trifluridine/tipiracil group and abdominal pain (n=15 [9%]) and general deterioration of physical health (n=15 [9%]) in the placebo group. Serious adverse events of any cause were reported in 143 (43%) patients in the trifluridine/tipiracil group and 70 (42%) in the placebo group. One treatment-related death was reported in each group (because of cardiopulmonary arrest in the trifluridine/tipiracil group and because of toxic hepatitis in the placebo group)., Interpretation: Trifluridine/tipiracil significantly improved overall survival compared with placebo and was well tolerated in this heavily pretreated population of patients with advanced gastric cancer. Trifluridine/tipiracil could be a new treatment option in this population who represent a high unmet medical need., Funding: Taiho Oncology and Taiho Pharmaceutical., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Studies in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and advanced follicular lymphoma have shown that CT-P10, a rituximab biosimilar, has equivalent or non-inferior efficacy and pharmacokinetics to rituximab. We aimed to assess the therapeutic equivalence of single-agent CT-P10 and rituximab in patients with newly diagnosed low-tumour burden follicular lymphoma., Methods: In this ongoing, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, active-controlled, phase 3 trial, adult patients (≥18 years) with stage II-IV low-tumour-burden follicular lymphoma were randomly assigned (1:1) using an interactive web or voice response system stratified by region, stage, and age to CT-P10 or US-sourced rituximab. Patients received CT-P10 or rituximab (375 mg/m 2 intravenous) on day 1 of four 7-day cycles (induction period). Patients who had disease control after the induction period continued to a maintenance period of CT-P10 or rituximab administered every 8 weeks for six cycles and, if completed, a second year of maintenance therapy of additional CT-P10 (every 8 weeks for six cycles) was offered. The study was partially unmasked after database lock (Feb 23, 2018) for all data up to 7 months (before cycle 3 of the maintenance period). The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who achieved an overall response by 7 months in the intention-to-treat population. Efficacy equivalence was shown if the two-sided 90% CIs for the treatment difference in the proportion of responders between CT-P10 and rituximab was within the equivalence margin of 17%. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02260804., Findings: Between Nov 9, 2015, and Jan 4, 2018, 402 patients were assessed for eligibility, of whom 258 were randomly assigned: 130 to CT-P10 and 128 to rituximab. 108 (83%) of 130 patients assigned to CT-P10 and 104 (81%) of 128 assigned to rituximab achieved an overall response by month 7 (treatment difference estimate 1·8%; 90% CI -6·43 to 10·20). Therapeutic equivalence was shown (90% CIs were within the prespecified margin of 17%). The most common grade 3 or 4 treatment-emergent adverse events were decreased neutrophil count (two grade 3 in the CT-P10 group) and neutropenia (one in each group); all other grade 3 or 4 treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in one patient each. Six (5%) of 130 patients who received CT-P10 and three (2%) of 128 who received rituximab experienced at least one treatment-emergent serious adverse event., Interpretation: CT-P10 was equivalent to rituximab in terms of efficacy and was well tolerated. CT-P10 monotherapy is suggested as a new therapeutic option for patients with low-tumour-burden follicular lymphoma., Funding: Celltrion, Inc., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

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-P6 is a proposed biosimilar to reference trastuzumab. In this study, we aimed to establish equivalence of CT-P6 to reference trastuzumab in neoadjuvant treatment of HER2-positive early-stage breast cancer., Methods: In this randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, phase 3 equivalence trial, we recruited women aged 18 years or older with stage I-IIIa operable HER2-positive breast cancer from 112 centres in 23 countries. Inclusion criteria were an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1; a normal left ventricular ejection fraction of at least 55%; adequate bone marrow, hepatic, and renal function; at least one measureable lesion; and known oestrogen and progesterone receptor status. Exclusion criteria included bilateral breast cancer, previous breast cancer treatment, previous anthracycline treatment, and pregnancy or lactation. We randomly allocated patients 1:1 to receive neoadjuvant CT-P6 or reference trastuzumab intravenously (eight cycles, each lasting 3 weeks, for 24 weeks; 8 mg/kg on day 1 of cycle 1 and 6 mg/kg on day 1 of cycles 2-8) in conjunction with neoadjuvant docetaxel (75 mg/m 2 on day 1 of cycles 1-4) and FEC (fluorouracil [500 mg/m 2 ], epirubicin [75 mg/m 2 ], and cyclophosphamide [500 mg/m 2 ]; day 1 of cycles 5-8) therapy. We stratified randomisation by clinical stage, receptor status, and country and used permuted blocks. We did surgery within 3-6 weeks of the final neoadjuvant study drug dose, followed by an adjuvant treatment period of up to 1 year. We monitored long-term safety and efficacy for 3 years after the last patient was enrolled. Participants and investigators were masked to treatment until study completion. The primary efficacy endpoint, analysed in the per-protocol population, was pathological complete response, assessed via specimens obtained during surgery, analysed by masked central review of local histopathology reports. The equivalence margin was -0·15 to 0·15. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02162667, and is ongoing, but no longer recruiting., Findings: Between Aug 7, 2014, and May 6, 2016, we randomly allocated 549 patients (271 [49%] to CT-P6 vs 278 [51%] to reference trastuzumab). A similar proportion of patients achieved pathological complete response with CT-P6 (116 [46·8%; 95% CI 40·4-53·2] of 248 patients) and reference trastuzumab (129 [50·4%; 44·1-56·7] of 256 patients). The 95% CI of the estimated treatment outcome difference (-0·04% [95% CI -0·12 to 0·05]) was within the equivalence margin. 19 (7%) of 271 patients in the CT-P6 group reported serious treatment-emergent adverse events versus 22 (8%) of 278 in the reference trastuzumab group; frequent (occurring in more than one patient) serious adverse events were febrile neutropenia (four [1%] vs one [<1%]) and neutropenia (one [<1%] vs two [1%]). Grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events occurred in 17 (6%) of 271 patients in the CT-P6 group versus 23 (8%) of 278 in the reference trastuzumab group; the most frequently reported adverse event was neutropenia in ten (4%) versus 14 (5%)., Interpretation: CT-P6 showed equivalent efficacy to reference trastuzumab and adverse events were similar. Availability of trastuzumab biosimilars could increase access to this targeted therapy for HER2-positive early-stage cancer., Funding: Celltrion Inc., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)