Same but different? A thematic analysis on adalimumab biosimilar switching among patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Biologic medications have dramatically enhanced the treatment of many chronic paediatric inflammatory conditions. Their high cost is a factor that prohibits their broader use. Cheaper generic versions, or biosimilars, are increasingly being used. Healthcare services are switching some patients over to biosimilars for economic reasons, known as 'non-medical switching'. Some patients unsuccessfully switch due to perceived decreases in efficacy or non-specific drug effects. The implications of failed switching include exhaustion of therapeutic options, unnecessary exposure to other medications, increased healthcare utilisation, worse patient outcomes and higher overall healthcare costs. Patient perceptions almost certainly play a role in these 'failed switches'. METHODS: A thematic analysis was performed to better understand patient and parent perceptions on non-medical biosimilar switching. The study was conducted in accordance with the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research recommendations. Patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis currently taking adalimumab were included. RESULTS: Nine families were interviewed just prior to a hospital trust-wide non-medical switch to an adalimumab biosimilar. Several common themes were identified. The most frequent concerns were regarding practical aspects of the switch including the medication administration device type; the colour of the medication and administration device; and whether the injections would sting more. The relative safety and efficacy of the biosimilar was raised although most families felt that there would be no significant difference. Anxieties about the switch were largely placated by reassurances from the medical team. CONCLUSIONS: We derived recommendations based on existing adult literature and the observations from our study to optimise the benefits from non-medical biosimilar switching.

Phase II study of a three-dose primary vaccination course of DTPa-IPV/Hib-MenC-TT followed by a 12-month Hib-MenC-TT booster in healthy infants.

AIM: To test for immunologic noninferiority of antibody responses to Hib and MenC using a 6-in-1 combination vaccine (DTPa-IPV/Hib-MenC-TT) compared with DTPa-IPV-Hib plus MenC-CRM197, before and after a 12-month Hib-MenC-TT booster. METHODS: Pragmatic open-label, randomized, multicenter, UK study. "6-in-1" group received DTPa-IPV/Hib-MenC-TT at 2, 3 and 4 months; control group received DTPa-IPV-Hib at 2, 3 and 4 months and MenC-CRM197 at 3 and 4 months. Both groups received Hib-MenC-TT at 12 months. Concomitant vaccines: pneumococcal conjugate vaccine at 2, 4 and 13 months, and measles, mumps and rubella vaccine at 13 months. RESULTS: One hundred forty-two children were randomized to each group. One hundred children in the "6-in-1" group and 112 control group children completed the study according-to-protocol. One month postprimary immunizations: 100% of "6-in-1" group and 93.3% of control children had anti-polyribosylribitol phosphate (PRP) IgG ≥0.15 µg/mL; 96.2% and 100%, respectively, had rSBA-MenC titers ≥1:8. One month after booster all children met these thresholds, with anti-PRP geometric mean concentrations of 66.7 (53.3; 83.5) in "6-in-1" recipients and 26.9 (20.9; 34.6) in control children (4.4 [3.5; 5.4] and 3.0 [2.2-4.2] postprimary immunizations, respectively,). rSBA-MenC geometric mean titers were 3062.9 (2421.2; 3874.6) and 954.0 (761.3; 1195.5), respectively, postbooster and 393.2 (292.5; 528.7) and 3110.5 (2612; 3704.2) postprimary. CONCLUSION: Noninferiority of DTPa-IPV/Hib-MenC-TT compared with DTPa-IPV/Hib plus MenC-CRM197 was demonstrated. In the "6-in-1" group, lower postprimary and greater postbooster rSBA-MenC geometric mean titers suggest memory B-cell priming may be favored by this vaccine over plasma cell induction. Furthermore, greater immunogenicity of TT conjugates used in both primary and booster vaccines in this group may be important.