Real-world experience of rituximab biosimilar GP2013 in rheumatoid arthritis patients naïve to or switched from reference rituximab.

Randomized controlled trials showed high comparability of biosimilar rituximab (bs-RTX) GP2013 to biologic originator RTX (bo-RTX). Data on effectiveness of switching from bo-RTX to bs-RTX, starting therapy with bs-RTX, and bs-RTX drug survival in real-world setting are sparse. To explore long-term drug effectiveness and survival of bs-RTX GP2013 in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients both naïve to and mandatory switched from bo-RTX, and to clarify reasons for treatment cessation. Retrospective observational cohort study including RA outpatient clinic patients treated with bs-RTX between 2018 and 2021 in Norway. Patients were examined and monitored using recommended measures for disease activity and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). For description of population medians and interquartile range were used. Difference between observation times was assessed with Signed-Rank test, drug survival with Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Reasons for discontinuation were ascertained. Among 110 patients, at baseline, 88 were mandatory switched from bo-RTX and 22 were RTX-naïve. During 2-year follow-up, disease activity and PROs measures remained stable in switchers subgroup and improved in subgroup starting bs-RTX for the first time. Overall drug survival was 80.0% after 1 year and 57.7% after 2 years and was significantly higher in bs-RTX-switched than in bs-RTX-naïve patients (p = 0.036). Two most frequently reported reasons for drug discontinuation were remission (38.6%) and doctor's decision (27.1%). RA patients treated with bs-RTX had satisfactory treatment response and drug retention rates which supports equivalence of bs-RTX GP2013 to bo-RTX, both in patients naïve to and mandatory switched from bo-RTX.

National trends in prescription drug expenditures and projections for 2023.

PURPOSE: To report historical patterns of pharmaceutical expenditures, to identify factors that may influence future spending, and to predict growth in drug spending in 2023 in the United States, with a focus on the nonfederal hospital and clinic sectors. METHODS: Historical patterns were assessed by examining data on drug purchases from manufacturers using the IQVIA National Sales Perspectives database. Factors that may influence drug spending in hospitals and clinics in 2023 were reviewed, including new drug approvals, patent expirations, and potential new policies or legislation. Focused analyses were conducted for biosimilars, cancer drugs, diabetes medications, generics, COVID-19 pandemic influence, and specialty drugs. For nonfederal hospitals, clinics, and overall (all sectors), estimates of growth of pharmaceutical expenditures in 2023 were based on a combination of quantitative analyses and expert opinion. RESULTS: In 2022, overall pharmaceutical expenditures in the US grew 9.4% compared to 2021, for a total of $633.5 billion. Utilization (a 5.9% increase), price (a 1.7% increase) and new drugs (a 1.8% increase) drove this increase. Adalimumab was the top-selling drug in 2022, followed by semaglutide and apixaban. Drug expenditures were $37.2 billion (a 5.9% decrease) and $116.9 billion (a 10.4% increase) in nonfederal hospitals and clinics, respectively. In clinics, new products and increased utilization growth drove growth, with a small impact from price changes. In nonfederal hospitals, a drop in utilization led to a decrease in expenditures, with price changes and new drugs contributing to growth in spending. Several new drugs that will influence spending have been or are expected to be approved in 2023. Specialty and cancer drugs will continue to drive expenditures along with the evolution of the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSION: For 2023, we expect overall prescription drug spending to rise by 6.0% to 8.0%, whereas in clinics and hospitals we anticipate increases of 8.0% to 10.0% and 1.0% to 3.0%, respectively, compared to 2022. These national estimates of future pharmaceutical expenditure growth may not be representative of any particular health system because of the myriad of local factors that influence actual spending.

Immunology of pregnancy and reproductive health in autoimmune rheumatic diseases. Update from the 11th International Conference on Reproduction, Pregnancy and Rheumatic Diseases.

Autoimmune rheumatic diseases (ARD) can affect women and men during fertile age, therefore reproductive health is a priority issue in rheumatology. Many topics need to be considered during preconception counselling: fertility, the impact of disease-related factors on pregnancy outcomes, the influence of pregnancy on disease activity, the compatibility of medications with pregnancy and breastfeeding. Risk stratification and individualized treatment approach elaborated by a multidisciplinary team minimize the risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes (APO). Research has been focused on identifying biomarkers that can be predictive of APO. Specifically, preeclampsia and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy tend to develop more frequently in women with ARD. Placental insufficiency can lead to intrauterine growth restriction and small-for-gestational age newborns. Such APO have been shown to be associated with maternal disease activity in different ARD. Therefore, a key message to be addressed to the woman wishing for a pregnancy and to her family is that treatment with compatible drugs is the best way to ensure maternal and fetal wellbeing. An increasing number of medications have entered the management of ARD, but data about their use in pregnancy and lactation are scarce. More information is needed for most biologic drugs and their biosimilars, and for the so-called small molecules, while there is sufficient evidence to recommend the use of TNF inhibitors if needed for keeping maternal disease under control. Other issues related to the reproductive journey have emerged as "unmet needs", such as sexual dysfunction, contraception, medically assisted reproduction techniques, long-term outcome of children, and they will be addressed in this review paper. Collaborative research has been instrumental to reach current knowledge and the future will bring novel insights thanks to pregnancy registries and prospective studies that have been established in several Countries and to their joint efforts in merging data.

Multiple infliximab biosimilar switches appear to be safe and effective in a real-world inflammatory bowel disease cohort.

BACKGROUND: Switching from originator infliximab (IFX) to biosimilar IFX is effective and safe. However, data on multiple switching are scarce. The Edinburgh inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) unit has undertaken three switch programmes: (1) Remicade to CT-P13 (2016), (2) CT-P13 to SB2 (2020), and (3) SB2 to CT-P13 (2021). OBJECTIVE: The primary endpoint of this study was to assess CT-P13 persistence following switch from SB2. Secondary endpoints included persistence stratified by the number of biosimilar switches (single, double and triple), effectiveness and safety. METHODS: We performed a prospective, observational, cohort study. All adult IBD patients on IFX biosimilar SB2 underwent an elective switch to CT-P13. Patients were reviewed in a virtual biologic clinic with protocol driven collection of clinical disease activity, C-reactive protein (CRP), faecal calprotectin (FC), IFX trough/antibody levels, and drug survival. RESULTS: 297 patients (CD n = 196 [66%], ulcerative colitis/inflammatory bowel disease unclassified n = 101, [34%]) were switched (followed-up: 7.5 months [6.8-8.1]). This was the third, second and first IFX switch for 67/297 (22.5%), 138/297 (46.5%) and 92/297 (31%) of the cohort respectively. 90.6% of patients remained on IFX during follow-up. The number of switches was not independently associated with IFX persistence after adjusting for confounders. Clinical (p = 0.77), biochemical (CRP ≤5 mg/ml; p = 0.75) and faecal biomarker (FC<250 µg/g; p = 0.63) remission were comparable at baseline, week 12 and week 24. CONCLUSION: Multiple successive switches from IFX originator to biosimilars are effective and safe in patients with IBD, irrespective of the number of IFX switches.

Clinical and Regulatory Challenges and Opportunities for Monoclonal Antibodies in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Lessons from COVID-19 and Beyond.

Monoclonal antibodies are an effective and growing class of pharmaceuticals for the treatment and prevention of a broad range of non-communicable and infectious diseases; however, most low- and middle-income countries have limited access to these innovative products. Many factors contribute to the global inequity of access to these products; however, in this report, we focus on clinical and regulatory complexities as further highlighted by the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Despite a higher prevalence of many diseases in low- and middle-income countries, only 12% of clinical trials for monoclonal antibodies are conducted in these countries. Additionally, only a fraction of the available monoclonal antibodies in the USA and European Union are authorized for use in low- and middle-income countries. Through learnings from desk research and global symposia with international partners, we present recommendations to harmonize processes and facilitate regional and international collaborations for more rapid approval of fit-for-purpose innovative monoclonal antibodies and biosimilars in low- and middle-income countries.

[Cerebrolysin in the treatment of cognitive impairment]. / Tserebrolizin v lechenii kognitivnykh narushenii.

Cognitive impairment is one of the most important problems of modern health care. Currently, according to WHO, more than 55 million people worldwide are living with dementia. Dementia is one of the leading causes of disability and addiction among older people worldwide. Even more significant is the number of patients with mild cognitive impairment who have an increased risk of progression to dementia compared to people of the same age without cognitive impairment. The number of patients with cognitive impairment has also increased due to the consequences of COVID-19. It is necessary to use drugs that not only improve cognitive functions, but also slow down their progression. One of these drugs is cerebrolysin, the effectiveness of which has been confirmed in various types of cognitive impairment. Cerebrolysin, being a preparation from the brain of a pig, belongs to the group of biological drugs. In the production of Cerebrolysin very strict measures are taken to comply with the technology, which ensures the quality and identity of the product from batch to batch. The experience of many years of clinical use of Cerebrolysin testifies not only to its high efficiency, but also to its safety. It should be taken into account that similar substances can be developed in relation to biological products - biosimilars or biosimilars, which can be considered comparable only in case of equivalent pharmacokinetic parameters, efficacy and safety.

Efficacy and safety of a new ranibizumab biosimilar CKD-701 using a pro re nata treatment regimen in neovascular age-related macular degeneration: A phase 3 randomized clinical trial.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to establish the efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity equivalence of the proposed biosimilar CKD-701 with the reference ranibizumab in patients with treatment-naïve neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 312 participants with active subfoveal choroidal neovascularization were randomly assigned to either the CKD-701 (n = 156) or reference ranibizumab (n = 156) arms. The initial 3-month loading intraocular injections were followed by pro re nata (PRN) dosing for 9 months. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with less than 15-letters of corrected visual acuity (BCVA) loss at 3 months visit (one month after last loading injection) compared to the baseline time point. The presence of retinal fluid, and changes in BCVA and central retinal thickness (CRT) were assessed as secondary efficacy outcomes. Immunogenicity and safety were evaluated in both treatment arms. RESULTS: In the CKD-701 arm, 143 (97.95%) patients lost <15 letters in the BCVA at 3 months compared to 143 (98.62%) in the reference arm (P = 0.67). The BCVA improved with a mean improvement of +7.0 (CKD-701) and +6.2 (ranibizumab) letters at 3 months (P = 0.43). The least-squares mean (SE) changes in CRT at 3 months from the baseline were -119.3 (12.0) µm and -124.5 (11.9) µm in the CKD-701 and ranibizumab groups, respectively (P = 0.74). The proportion of participants with subretinal or intraretinal fluid at 3, 6, and 12 months was similar between the study arms. The number (SE) of injections were 8.36 (3.13) in the CKD-701 and 8.26 (2.92) in ranibizumab (P = 0.62). The occurrence of adverse events and antidrug antibody in the study arms were also not statistically different. CONCLUSION: CKD-701 is a biosimilar to the reference ranibizumab in terms of efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity for the treatment of patients with nAMD. Moreover, improvement and maintenance of visual outcome were achieved through PRN regimen.

Positioning of tofacitinib in treatment of ulcerative colitis: a global perspective.

INTRODUCTION: Tofacitinib has emerged as a useful drug for the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC). AREAS COVERED: There is an unmet need for cost-effective, non-immunogenic drugs with a safe adverse effect profile to treat patients with ulcerative colitis. In the present review, we evaluate the available literature to inform the appropriate positioning of tofacitinib in the current drug landscape and identify subsets where its use should be done with caution. EXPERT OPINION: Tofacitinib is helpful in the treatment of patients where the standard conventional or biological therapies have failed or were not tolerated. With lower costs of the generic drug than the biologicals (or biosimilars), it could be an important therapy in low- to middle-income countries. The risk of infections, especially Herpes Zoster and tuberculosis, needs to be addressed before initiation. Tofacitinib should be avoided in patients with venous thromboembolism and cardiovascular disease risk factors. Due to limited evidence, the use is not recommended in pregnancy, while it should be used with caution in elderly citizens. Future trials should look into the head-to-head comparison of tofacitinib with biologicals. The role of tofacitinib in acute severe colitis needs evaluation with comparative trials with current standards of care.

Adalimumab biosimilars in the therapy of Crohn´s disease and ulcerative colitis: Prospective multicentric clinical monitoring.

OBJECTIVE: The adalimumab biosimilars FKB327 and GP2017 were approved for the therapy of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Relatively few prospective studies with biosimilar adalimumab in patients with IBD have been published. The aim of this prospective observational study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the biosimilar adalimumab. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Adalimumab biosimilars FKB327 (Hulio®) and GP2017 (Hyrimoz®) were indicated to 50 naive patients in terms of biological therapy with Crohn's disease (CD) or ulcerative colitis (UC). Effectiveness of therapy was evaluated via the Crohn's Disease Activity Index [CDAI] or the Mayo Scoring System [MSS] in patients with CD or UC, respectively, before and after 12 weeks. Additional goals were to evaluate weight changes, laboratory tests and complications or adverse events of this therapy. RESULTS: In CD patients, remission (CDAI <150) was achieved in 73.5% of cases, partial response (≥70-point decrease in CDAI score from baseline) in 11.8%, no response in 11.8% and 2.9% patients discontinued therapy. In UC patients, remission (total score on partial Mayo index ≤2 points) was achieved only in 18.8% of cases, partial response (≥2-point decrease in partial Mayo score from baseline) in 43.8%, no response in 25.0% and 12.5% patients discontinued therapy. There were statistically significant improvements in CDAI, MSS, haemoglobin, fecal calprotectin, albumin and CRP serum levels after 12 weeks of therapy. Seven adverse events were identified, three of which resulted in therapy being discontinued. CONCLUSIONS: This prospective observational study proved the effectiveness of the adalimumab biosimilars FKB327 and GP2017 in IBD.

Scientific, ethical, and legal considerations for the inclusion of pregnant people in clinical trials.

Clinical trials to address the COVID-19 public health emergency have broadly excluded pregnant people from participation, illustrating a long-standing trend of clinical trial exclusion that has led to a clear knowledge gap and unmet need in the treatment and prevention of medical conditions experienced during pregnancy and of pregnancy-related conditions. Drugs (includes products such as drugs, biologics, biosimilars and vaccines) approved for a certain medical condition in adults are also approved for use in pregnant adults with the same medical condition, unless contraindicated for use in pregnancy. However, there are limited pregnancy-specific data on risks and benefits of drugs in pregnant people, despite their approval for all adults. The United States Food and Drug Administration-approved medical products are used widely by pregnant people, 90% of whom take at least 1 medication during the course of their pregnancy despite there being sparse data from clinical trials on these products in pregnancy. This overall lack of clinical data precludes informed decision-making, causing clinicians and pregnant patients to have to decide whether to pursue treatment without an adequate understanding of potential effects. Although some United States Food and Drug Administration initiatives and other federal efforts have helped to promote the inclusion of pregnant people in clinical research, broader collaboration and reforms are needed to address challenges related to the design and conduct of trials that enroll pregnant people, and to forge a culture of widespread inclusion of pregnant people in clinical research. This article summarizes the scientific, ethical, and legal considerations governing research conducted during pregnancy, as discussed during a recent subject matter expert convening held by the Duke-Margolis Center for Health Policy and the United States Food and Drug Administration on this topic. This article also recommends strategies for overcoming impediments to inclusion and trial conduct.

How to select a best-value biological medicine? A practical model to support hospital pharmacists.

PURPOSE: With the growing availability of biosimilars on the global market, clinicians and pharmacists have multiple off-patent biological products to choose from. Besides the competitiveness of the product's price, other criteria should be considered when selecting a best-value biological. This article aims to provide a model to facilitate transparent best-value biological selection in the off-patent biological medicines segment. SUMMARY: The presented model was developed on the basis of established multicriteria decision analysis tools for rational and transparent medicine selection, ie, the System of Objectified Judgement Analysis and InforMatrix. Criteria for the model were informed by earlier research, a literature search, and evaluation by the authors. The developed model includes up-to-date guidance on criteria that can be considered in selection and provides background on the allocation of weights that may aid hospital pharmacists and clinicians with decision-making in practice. Three main categories of criteria besides price were identified and included in the model: (1) product-driven criteria, (2) service-driven criteria, and (3) patient-driven criteria. Product-driven criteria include technical product features and licensed therapeutic indications. Service-driven criteria consist of supply conditions, value-added services, and environment and sustainability criteria. Patient-driven criteria contain product administration elements such as ease of use and service elements such as patient support programs. Relative weighting of the criteria is largely context dependent and should in a given setting be determined at the beginning of the process. CONCLUSION: The practical model described here may support hospital pharmacists and clinicians with transparent and evidence-based best-value biological selection in clinical practice.

The second decade of anti-TNF-a therapy in clinical practice: new lessons and future directions in the COVID-19 era.

Since the late 1990s, tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) inhibitors (anti-TNFs) have revolutionized the therapy of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) affecting the gut, joints, skin and eyes. Although the therapeutic armamentarium in IMIDs is being constantly expanded, anti-TNFs remain the cornerstone of their treatment. During the second decade of their application in clinical practice, a large body of additional knowledge has accumulated regarding various aspects of anti-TNF-α therapy, whereas new indications have been added. Recent experimental studies have shown that anti-TNFs exert their beneficial effects not only by restoring aberrant TNF-mediated immune mechanisms, but also by de-activating pathogenic fibroblast-like mesenchymal cells. Real-world data on millions of patients further confirmed the remarkable efficacy of anti-TNFs. It is now clear that anti-TNFs alter the physical course of inflammatory arthritis and inflammatory bowel disease, leading to inhibition of local and systemic bone loss and to a decline in the number of surgeries for disease-related complications, while anti-TNFs improve morbidity and mortality, acting beneficially also on cardiovascular comorbidities. On the other hand, no new safety signals emerged, whereas anti-TNF-α safety in pregnancy and amid the COVID-19 pandemic was confirmed. The use of biosimilars was associated with cost reductions making anti-TNFs more widely available. Moreover, the current implementation of the "treat-to-target" approach and treatment de-escalation strategies of IMIDs were based on anti-TNFs. An intensive search to discover biomarkers to optimize response to anti-TNF-α treatment is currently ongoing. Finally, selective targeting of TNF-α receptors, new forms of anti-TNFs and combinations with other agents, are being tested in clinical trials and will probably expand the spectrum of TNF-α inhibition as a therapeutic strategy for IMIDs.

Interchangeability for Biologics is a Legal Distinction in the USA, Not a Clinical One.

Biologics are increasingly vital medicines that significantly reduce morbidity as well as mortality, yet access continues to be an issue even in apparently wealthy countries, such as the USA. While patient access is expected to improve with the introduction of biosimilars, misperceptions in a significant part based on terminology continue to make a sustained contribution by biosimilars difficult. Patients are and will continue to suffer needlessly if biosimilars continue to be impugned. Consequently, it is increasingly urgent that semantics are clarified, and in particular, the implication that interchangeable biologics are better biosimilars dismissed. This paper distinguishes between the real differences between biologics that matter clinically to patients and discusses the actual meaning of a US Food and Drug Administration designation of interchangeability for a biosimilar product. This will help highlight where there is need for further Food and Drug Administration education and which stakeholders likely need that education the most.

Online Hydrophilic Interaction Chromatography (HILIC) Enhanced Top-Down Mass Spectrometry Characterization of the SARS-CoV-2 Spike Receptor-Binding Domain.

SARS-CoV-2 cellular infection is mediated by the heavily glycosylated spike protein. Recombinant versions of the spike protein and the receptor-binding domain (RBD) are necessary for seropositivity assays and can potentially serve as vaccines against viral infection. RBD plays key roles in the spike protein's structure and function, and thus, comprehensive characterization of recombinant RBD is critically important for biopharmaceutical applications. Liquid chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry has been widely used to characterize post-translational modifications in proteins, including glycosylation. Most studies of RBDs were performed at the proteolytic peptide (bottom-up proteomics) or released glycan level because of the technical challenges in resolving highly heterogeneous glycans at the intact protein level. Herein, we evaluated several online separation techniques: (1) C2 reverse-phase liquid chromatography (RPLC), (2) capillary zone electrophoresis (CZE), and (3) acrylamide-based monolithic hydrophilic interaction chromatography (HILIC) to separate intact recombinant RBDs with varying combinations of glycosylations (glycoforms) for top-down mass spectrometry (MS). Within the conditions we explored, the HILIC method was superior to RPLC and CZE at separating RBD glycoforms, which differ significantly in neutral glycan groups. In addition, our top-down analysis readily captured unexpected modifications (e.g., cysteinylation and N-terminal sequence variation) and low abundance, heavily glycosylated proteoforms that may be missed by using glycopeptide data alone. The HILIC top-down MS platform holds great potential in resolving heterogeneous glycoproteins for facile comparison of biosimilars in quality control applications.

Re-Routing Infliximab Therapy: Subcutaneous Infliximab Opens a Path Towards Greater Convenience and Clinical Benefit.

Subcutaneous infliximab recently received approval for the treatment of various immune-mediated inflammatory diseases in Europe, following pivotal clinical trials in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and inflammatory bowel disease. Subcutaneous infliximab demonstrated an improved pharmacokinetic profile compared with intravenous infliximab: the more stable exposure and increased systemic drug concentrations mean it has been cited as a biobetter. Alongside the pharmacokinetic advantages, potential benefits for efficacy, immunogenicity, and health-related quality-of-life outcomes have been suggested with subcutaneous infliximab. During the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, the benefits of subcutaneous over intravenous therapies became apparent: switching from intravenous to subcutaneous infliximab reduced the hospital visit-related healthcare resource burden and potential viral transmission. Clinical advantages observed in pivotal trials are also being seen in the real world. Accumulating experience from four European countries (the UK, Spain, France, and Germany) in patients with rheumatic diseases and inflammatory bowel disease supports clinical trial findings that subcutaneous infliximab is well tolerated, increases serum drug concentrations, and offers maintained or improved efficacy outcomes for patients switching from intravenous infliximab. Initial evidence is emerging with subcutaneous infliximab treatment after intravenous infliximab failure. High patient satisfaction and pharmacoeconomic benefits have also been reported with subcutaneous infliximab. Treatments aligned with patient preferences for the flexibility and convenience of at-home subcutaneous administration could boost adherence and treatment outcomes. Altogether, findings suggest that switching from intravenous to subcutaneous infliximab could be advantageous, and healthcare professionals should be prepared to discuss supporting data as part of shared decision making during patient consultations.

The tumor necrosis factor inhibitor infliximab is one treatment option that may be appropriate for patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. Patients may prefer tumor necrosis factor inhibitors administered via the subcutaneous (SC) or intravenous (IV) route, with preferences influencing treatment satisfaction and outcomes. In 2019, CT-P13 SC became the first SC infliximab product to receive regulatory approval in Europe, based on pivotal clinical studies that compared SC infliximab to IV infliximab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and inflammatory bowel disease. Subcutaneous infliximab is now approved in Europe for the treatment of adults with rheumatoid arthritis, Crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis, ankylosing spondylitis, psoriatic arthritis, and psoriasis. Patients began to switch from IV to SC infliximab outside clinical trials in March 2020, during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Switching from IV to SC infliximab allowed patients to self-administer treatment at home rather than attend hospital for infusions, reducing potential hospital-acquired infections and lessening the strain on healthcare systems during the pandemic. Clinical trial evidence and growing real-world experience demonstrate that SC infliximab offers clinical advantages in terms of an improved pharmacokinetic profile and potential efficacy, immunogenicity, and health-related quality-of-life benefits compared with IV infliximab. Patients have also reported increased satisfaction with SC infliximab after switching from IV infliximab. Together with the long-standing flexibility and convenience benefits of SC administration, the clinical advantages of SC infliximab make it a valid therapeutic option for rheumatoid arthritis and inflammatory bowel disease. This warrants discussion with appropriate patients as part of shared treatment decision making.

A randomized pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic study comparing the bioequivalence of potential biosimilar candidate P044 with reference medicine in healthy volunteers.

BACKGROUND: P044 is a proposed biosimilar candidate of Teriparatide for reference medicine, Forsteo®. This study was designed to evaluate the Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) bioequivalence between P044 and Forsteo®. METHODS: In this randomized, open-label, single-dose, crossover study, 66 healthy female subjects were randomized to receive P044 and Forsteo®. The primary PK endpoints of the study were the area under the concentration versus time from zero to infinity (AUC0-inf) and maximum plasma concentration (Cmax). Secondary endpoints included area under the concentration versus time from zero to the last quantifiable concentration (AUC0-last) and Cmax for PD parameter, additional PK parameters and safety. RESULTS: Sixty-six subjects were enrolled in the study and baseline demographics were similar between the two treatments. The two treatments presented similar PK/PD parameters and the 90% confidence interval for primary and secondary endpoints were within the bioequivalence acceptance range (80.00-125.00%) for all parameters. None of the subjects experienced serious adverse event, and all of the reported adverse events were mild and similar between two treatments. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated the PK/PD similarity of P044 to reference medicine, Forsteo® and safety profiles were comparable between treatments. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT Number: 2019-004477-82.

National trends in prescription drug expenditures and projections for 2022.

PURPOSE: To report historical patterns of pharmaceutical expenditures, to identify factors that may influence future spending, and to predict growth in drug spending in 2022 in the United States, with a focus on the nonfederal hospital and clinic sectors. METHODS: Historical patterns were assessed by examining data on drug purchases from manufacturers using the IQVIA National Sales Perspectives database. Factors that may influence drug spending in hospitals and clinics in 2022 were reviewed-including new drug approvals, patent expirations, and potential new policies or legislation. Focused analyses were conducted for biosimilars, cancer drugs, generics, COVID-19 pandemic influence, and specialty drugs. For nonfederal hospitals, clinics, and overall (all sectors), estimates of growth of pharmaceutical expenditures in 2022 were based on a combination of quantitative analyses and expert opinion. RESULTS: In 2021, overall pharmaceutical expenditures in the US grew 7.7% compared to 2020, for a total of $576.9 billion. Utilization (a 4.8% increase), price (a 1.9% increase) and new drugs (a 1.1% increase) drove this increase. Adalimumab was the top drug in terms of overall expenditures in 2021, followed by apixaban and dulaglutide. Drug expenditures were $39.6 billion (a 8.4% increase) and $105.0 billion (a 7.7% increase) in nonfederal hospitals and in clinics, respectively. In clinics and hospitals, new products and increased utilization growth drove growth, with decreasing prices for both sectors acting as an expense restraint. Several new drugs that are likely to influence spending are expected to be approved in 2022. Specialty and cancer drugs will continue to drive expenditures along with the evolution of the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSION: For 2022, we expect overall prescription drug spending to rise by 4.0% to 6.0%, whereas in clinics and hospitals we anticipate increases of 7.0% to 9.0% and 3.0% to 5.0%, respectively, compared to 2021. These national estimates of future pharmaceutical expenditure growth may not be representative of any particular health system because of the myriad of local factors that influence actual spending.

Incidence of COVID-19 in 902 Patients With Immunomediated Inflammatory Diseases Treated With Biologics and Targeted Synthetic Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs-Findings From the BIOCOVID Study.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to examine the incidence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) among patients with immunomediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) treated with biologic or targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs and tsDMARDs) and to evaluate the influence of either IMIDs or related therapies on the incidence and evolution of COVID-19. METHODS: This observational, cross-sectional study was conducted from January 31, 2020, to May 15, 2020. Data of 902 patients were obtained from clinical records in hospitals, primary care units, and community pharmacies. Inclusion criteria were adults with IMIDs treated with bDMARDs or tsDMARDs who started therapy 3 months prior to study commencement. Patients with poor adherence to treatments were excluded. COVID-19 was classified as "definitive" (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 polymerase chain reaction [PCR]-positive), "possible" (characteristic symptoms and negative PCR), and "suspected" (characteristic symptoms but PCR not performed). RESULTS: COVID-19 was diagnosed in 70 patients (11 definitive, 19 possible, and 40 suspected). The cumulative incidence of definitive COVID-19 was 1.2%. When considering all cases, the incidence was 7.8%. Patients on biosimilars tumor necrosis factor blockers were more likely to have a diagnosis of COVID-19 (odds ratio, 2.308; p < 0.001). Patients on anti-B-cell therapies had a lower incidence of infections (p = 0.046). Low rates of hospitalization (14.3%), pneumonia (14.3%), death (2.9%), or thrombosis (2.9%) were observed, and 94.3% of patients recovered. CONCLUSIONS: The cumulative incidence of confirmed cases of COVID-19 was similar to the general population, with generally low hospitalization, intensive care management, and mortality rates. COVID-19 incidence was less frequent in patients with more severe immunosuppression.

Perspectives on Subcutaneous Infliximab for Rheumatic Diseases and Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Before, During, and After the COVID-19 Era.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has prompted significant changes in patient care in rheumatology and gastroenterology, with clinical guidance issued to manage ongoing therapy while minimising the risk of nosocomial infection for patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs). Subcutaneous (SC) formulations of biologics enable patients to self-administer treatments at home; however, switching between agents may be undesirable. CT-P13 SC is the first SC formulation of infliximab that received regulatory approval and may be termed a biobetter as it offers significant clinical advantages over intravenous (IV) infliximab, including improved pharmacokinetics and a convenient mode of delivery. Potential benefits in terms of reduced immunogenicity have also been suggested. With a new SC formulation, infliximab provides an additional option for dual formulation, which enables patients to transition from IV to SC administration route without changing agent. Before COVID-19, clinical trials supported the efficacy and safety of switching from IV to SC infliximab for patients with rheumatoid arthritis and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), and SC infliximab may have been selected on the basis of patient and HCP preferences for SC agents. During the pandemic, patients with rheumatic diseases and IBD have successfully switched from IV to SC infliximab, with some clinical benefits and high levels of patient satisfaction. As patients switched to SC therapeutics, the reduction in resource requirements for IV infusion services may have been particularly welcome given the pandemic, facilitating reorganisation and redeployment in overstretched healthcare systems, alongside pharmacoeconomic benefits and a reduction in exposure to nosocomial infection. Telemedicine and contactless healthcare have been pushed to the forefront during the pandemic, and a lasting shift towards remote patient management and community/home-based drug administration is anticipated. SC infliximab supports the implementation of this paradigm for future improvements of healthcare value delivered. The accumulation of real-world data during the pandemic supports the high level of confidence, with patients, physicians, and healthcare systems benefitting from its uptake.