A randomized, double blind, single dose, comparative study of the pharmacokinetics, safety and immunogenicity of MB02 (bevacizumab biosimilar) and reference bevacizumab in healthy male volunteers.

AIMS: The pharmacokinetic (PK) similarity between MB02, a proposed bevacizumab biosimilar, and reference bevacizumab approved from the USA (US-bevacizumab) and European Union (EU-bevacizumab) was evaluated. Safety and immunogenicity were also assessed. METHODS: In this phase 1, randomized, double blind, single dose, parallel group study, 114 healthy male volunteers were randomized 1:1:1 to receive a 3 mg/kg intravenous dose of MB02, US-bevacizumab or EU-bevacizumab, and evaluated for 100 days. PK similarity between MB02 and reference bevacizumab was determined using the standard bioequivalence criteria (0.80-1.25) for the area under the serum concentration-time curve from time 0 extrapolated to infinity (AUC(0-∞) ) and the maximum observed serum concentration (Cmax ). RESULTS: Baseline demographics were similar across treatment groups. All study drugs exhibited similar PK profile. The 90% confidence interval for the geometric lead square means ratios for the primary parameters AUC(0-∞) and Cmax for MB02, US-bevacizumab and EU-bevacizumab were fully contained within the pre-defined bioequivalence limits for the 3 pairwise comparisons: AUC(0-∞) (MB02:US-bevacizumab 0.998 [0.944 to 1.05]; MB02:EU-bevacizumab 1.07 [1.00 to 1.14]; and US-bevacizumab:EU-bevacizumab 0.934 [0.884 to 0.988]) and Cmax (MB02:US-bevacizumab 0.983 [0.897 to 1.08]; MB02:EU-bevacizumab 1.06 [0.976 to 1.16]; and; US-bevacizumab: EU-bevacizumab 0.926 [0.851 to 1.01]). Treatment emergent adverse events were reported in 87 subjects (76.3%), most being mild and with comparable incidence among treatment groups. Thirty-three subjects (28.9%) reported 56 possibly related treatment emergent adverse events with comparable incidence across treatments, the most frequent being headache (10.5%) and fatigue (3.5%). Anti-drug antibody incidence was low and similar between treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the PK similarity and bioequivalence of MB02 to the reference bevacizumab, whether approved from USA or EU. The safety and immunogenicity profile of MB02 was shown also to be similar to the bevacizumab reference product (NCT04238663).

Bevacizumab biosimilar BEVZ92 versus reference bevacizumab in combination with FOLFOX or FOLFIRI as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer: a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: BEVZ92 is a proposed biosimilar to bevacizumab. The two molecules have similar physicochemical and functional properties in in-vitro and preclinical studies. In this clinical study, we compared the pharmacokinetic profile, efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of BEVZ92 with reference bevacizumab as a first-line treatment in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. METHODS: We did a randomised, open-label trial at 15 centres in Argentina, Brazil, India, Spain, and Ukraine. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had metastatic colorectal cancer with at least one measurable non-irradiated lesion for which first-line chemotherapy was indicated and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 2 or less, had not received previous treatment for advanced disease, and whose bone marrow, hepatic, renal, and coagulation markers were all within normal ranges. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either BEVZ92 or reference bevacizumab (5 mg/kg on day 1 of each cycle every 2 weeks) in combination with fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) or fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI). Randomisation was done via a web service based on a stochastic minimisation algorithm and was stratified by chemotherapy regimen (FOLFOX vs FOLFIRI), previous adjuvant therapy (yes vs no), ECOG performance status (0-1 vs 2), and study site. The primary endpoint was the area under the concentration-versus-time curve after a single infusion (AUC0-336h) and at steady state (AUCss)-ie, at cycle 7-in the assessable population, which comprised all treated patients for whom serum concentration measurements were available during the first seven cycles. Bioequivalence was established if the 90% CIs for the ratio of BEVZ92 to reference bevacizumab of the geometric means for AUC0-336h and AUCss were within the acceptance interval of 80-125%. Secondary endpoints included objective response, clinical benefit, and progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population and immunogenicity and safety profiles in all treated patients. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02069704, and is closed to new participants, with follow-up completed. FINDINGS: 142 patients were randomly assigned, 71 to the BEVZ92 group and 71 to the reference bevacizumab group. Two participants assigned to BEVZ92 did not receive treatment (one withdrew consent, the other had a serious intestinal obstruction before starting treatment); therefore, the treated population comprised 69 patients in the BEVZ92 group and 71 in the reference bevacizumab group. The geometric mean ratio of AUC0-336h in the BEVZ92 versus the control group was 99·4% (90% CI 90·5-109·0) and of AUCss was 100·0% (90·2-112·0). Objective response (35 [49%] of 71 vs 40 [56%] of 71), clinical benefit (62 [87%] vs 65 [92%]), and progression-free survival (median 10·8 months [95% CI 7·4-11·5] vs 11·1 months [95% CI 8·0-12·8]) were similar in the BEVZ92 and reference bevacizumab groups. No relevant differences were noted between the safety profiles of the two study treatments. Neutropenia was the most common grade 3 or 4 adverse event reported in the BEVZ92 (14 [20%] of 69 patients) and reference bevacizumab (19 [27%] of 71 patients) groups. Serious adverse events occurred in 19 (28%) patients in the BEVZ92 group and 21 (30%) in the reference bevacizumab group. Two patients died because of bevacizumab-related serious adverse events: a sudden death in the BEVZ92 group and a serious large intestinal perforation in the reference bevacizumab group. The occurrence of anti-drug antibodies was low and similar in both treatment groups (two patients in the BEVZ92 group and one in the reference bevacizumab group). INTERPRETATION: Our results suggest that BEVZ92 and reference bevacizumab are pharmacokinetically bioequivalent and have no appreciable differences in efficacy, immunogenicity, and safety profiles as first-line treatment in combination with FOLFOX or FOLFIRI in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. FUNDING: mAbxience Research SL.