Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 1.644
Filter
1.
Health Aff (Millwood) ; 43(5): 717-724, 2024 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38709961

ABSTRACT

There is substantial disparity between Medicare Part D and employer-sponsored health insurance plans in the coverage of biosimilars and their reference biologics. These disparities may be due to design elements of Part D plans that encourage the adoption of more expensive biologic drugs. We undertook several analyses to illustrate the dynamics of benefit design incentives over time, compare formulary coverage in Part D plans with that of employer-sponsored plans, and study how the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 affected Part D formulary coverage. Using these analyses of Part D reforms enacted through the Bipartisan Budget Act, we discuss the implications of elements of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 that will be implemented in 2025. Biosimilar coverage increased by 23 percentage points five quarters after the Bipartisan Budget Act was implemented. We predict that the Inflation Reduction Act will also have a positive effect on biosimilar coverage. Given ample evidence of a relationship between drug coverage and utilization, our results suggest that Medicare patients and the federal government could realize substantial savings if Part D formularies resembled those of employer-sponsored plans.


Subject(s)
Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals , Health Care Reform , Insurance Coverage , Medicare Part D , United States , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/economics , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/therapeutic use , Humans , Health Benefit Plans, Employee/economics
3.
Value Health ; 27(5): 543-551, 2024 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38702140

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: A systematic literature review undertaken by the ISPOR Biosimilar Special Interest Group highlighted that limited guidance exists on how to assess biosimilars value and on appropriate economic evaluation techniques. This study described current health technology assessment (HTA) agency approaches for biosimilar value assessment. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews (n = 16) were carried out with HTA experts in Africa, America, Asia, Australia, and Europe to investigate current HTA practices for biosimilars. Data categorization was based on a thematic analysis approach. Findings from the qualitative data analysis were interpreted in view of relevant published literature. RESULTS: Our research suggests that in systems in which frameworks for biosimilar regulatory approval are well established, HTA agencies can accept the regulators' comparability exercise, and reimbursement decisions can generally be based on price comparisons. This approach is accepted in practice and allows streamlining of biosimilars value assessment. Nevertheless, conducting HTAs for biosimilars can be relevant when (1) the originator is not reimbursed, (2) the biosimilar marketing authorization holder seeks reimbursement for indications/populations, pharmaceutical forms, methods and routes of administration that differ with respect to the originator, and (3) a price premium is sought for a biosimilar based on an added-value claim. Further, HTA agencies' role conducting class-review updates following biosimilar availability can support greater patients' access to biologics. CONCLUSIONS: Internationally, there are differences in how national competent authorities on pricing and reimbursement of pharmaceuticals perceive HTA's role for biosimilars. Therefore, HTA agencies are encouraged to issue clear guidance on when and how to conduct HTAs for biosimilars, and on which economic techniques to apply.


Subject(s)
Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals , Technology Assessment, Biomedical , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/economics , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/therapeutic use , Humans , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Interviews as Topic
4.
Expert Opin Biol Ther ; 24(4): 305-312, 2024 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38664937

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The trastuzumab biosimilar CT-P6 is approved for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive early breast cancer (EBC), metastatic breast cancer (MBC), and metastatic gastric cancer (MGC). The objective of this post-marketing surveillance (PMS) study was to evaluate the real-world safety and effectiveness of CT-P6 in patients with HER2-positive cancers. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This open-label, observational, prospective, PMS study collected data via investigator surveys from 35 centers in the Republic of Korea (5 October 2018-4 October 2022). Eligible patients with HER2-positive EBC, MBC, or MGC started CT-P6 treatment during routine clinical practice, followed by 1-year observation. Evaluations included adverse events (AEs), adverse drug reactions (ADRs), and effectiveness. RESULTS: Safety was analyzed in 642 patients (494 EBC, 94 MBC, 54 MGC). Overall, 325 (50.6%) patients experienced 1316 AEs, and 550 ADRs occurred in 199 (31.0%) patients. Unexpected ADRs occurred in 62 (9.7%) patients. Unexpected ADRs and ADRs of special interest did not raise any new safety signals. Among trastuzumab-naïve patients, 34/106 (32.1%) with EBC achieved pathological complete response; 30/74 (40.5%) MBC and 24/49 (49.0%) MGC patients achieved complete or partial response. CONCLUSIONS: In a real-world setting, CT-P6 demonstrated safety and efficacy findings consistent with previous CT-P6 studies.


Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals , Breast Neoplasms , Product Surveillance, Postmarketing , Stomach Neoplasms , Trastuzumab , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological/adverse effects , Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological/therapeutic use , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/adverse effects , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/therapeutic use , Breast Neoplasms/drug therapy , Prospective Studies , Receptor, ErbB-2/genetics , Republic of Korea , Stomach Neoplasms/drug therapy , Trastuzumab/adverse effects , Trastuzumab/therapeutic use , Treatment Outcome
5.
Pharmaceut Med ; 38(3): 225-239, 2024 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38684588

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The Japanese biosimilar guideline requires that the sponsors conduct clinical studies such as comparative pharmacokinetic (PK), pharmacodynamic (PD), or efficacy studies. In each biosimilar development, the sponsors consider the clinical data package, and thus clinical data packages vary among biosimilar developments. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to elucidate the clinical data packages for the biosimilars approved in Japan. The details of clinical data packages and sample size for the regulatory approvals of biosimilars in Japan was reported. METHODS: We surveyed the clinical data packages and sample size based on the Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency (PMDA) website review reports between 2009 and 2023. RESULTS: Twenty-four biosimilars have been approved based on the comparative PK and efficacy studies, 10 biosimilars have been approved based on the comparative PK/PD study, and one biosimilar has been approved based on the comparative efficacy study. Regarding the sample size, comparative PK studies were conducted in healthy volunteers or patients for up to 300 cases, although the majority enrolled only 1-100 cases (68.1%, 32/47). Comparative PD studies enrolling 1-30, 31-60, and 61-90 cases totaled 4, 7, and 4 cases, respectively. Finally, comparative efficacy studies enrolling 1-300, 301-600, and 601-900 totaled 6, 10, and 11 cases, respectively. In particular, the oncology and rheumatology areas were the first and second disease areas recruiting 601-900 patients. CONCLUSION: Large numbers of patients were enrolled to conduct a comparative efficacy study. Efficient biosimilar development should be considered on the basis of the accumulation of scientific understanding of comparable features of biosimilars and their development.


Subject(s)
Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals , Drug Approval , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/pharmacokinetics , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/therapeutic use , Humans , Sample Size , Japan , Surveys and Questionnaires , Clinical Trials as Topic , Drug Development
6.
Diabetes Obes Metab ; 26(6): 2412-2421, 2024 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38558508

ABSTRACT

AIM: To evaluate the equivalence of immunogenicity, safety and efficacy of Gan & Lee (GL) Glargine (Basalin®; Gan & Lee Pharmaceutical) with that of the reference product (Lantus®) in adult participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus. METHODS: This was a phase 3, multicenter, open-label, equivalence trial conducted across 57 sites. In total, 567 participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to undergo treatment with either GL Glargine or Lantus® for 26 weeks. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants in each treatment arm who manifested treatment-induced anti-insulin antibodies (AIA). Secondary endpoints included efficacy and safety metrics, changes in glycated haemoglobin levels, and a comparative assessment of adverse events. Results were analysed using an equivalence test comparing the limits of the 90% confidence interval (CI) for treatment-induced AIA development to the prespecified margins. RESULTS: The percentages of participants positive for treatment-induced glycated haemoglobin by week 26 were similar between the GL Glargine (19.2%) and Lantus® (21.3%) treatment groups, with a treatment difference of -2.1 percentage points and a 90% CI (-7.6%, 3.5%) (predefined similarity margins: -10.7%, 10.7%). The difference in glycated haemoglobin was -0.08% (90% CI, -0.23, 0.06). The overall percentage of participants with any treatment-emergent adverse events was similar between the GL Glargine (80.1%) and Lantus® (81.6%) treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: GL Glargine was similar to Lantus® in terms of immunogenicity, efficacy, and safety, based on the current study.


Subject(s)
Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Glycated Hemoglobin , Hypoglycemic Agents , Insulin Glargine , Humans , Insulin Glargine/therapeutic use , Insulin Glargine/adverse effects , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/drug therapy , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/blood , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/immunology , Male , Female , Middle Aged , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/therapeutic use , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/adverse effects , Hypoglycemic Agents/therapeutic use , Hypoglycemic Agents/adverse effects , Glycated Hemoglobin/drug effects , Glycated Hemoglobin/metabolism , Glycated Hemoglobin/analysis , Aged , Treatment Outcome , Insulin Antibodies/blood , Adult , Blood Glucose/drug effects , Blood Glucose/metabolism , Therapeutic Equivalency , Hypoglycemia/chemically induced
7.
Clin Drug Investig ; 44(5): 367-370, 2024 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38683493

ABSTRACT

PB006 (Tyruko®) is the first biosimilar of the reference monoclonal anti-α4-integrin antibody natalizumab. It is approved for use in the same indications for which reference natalizumab is approved, as a single disease-modifying therapy in adults with highly active relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). PB006 has similar physicochemical and pharmacodynamic properties to those of reference natalizumab, and the pharmacokinetic similarity of the agents has been demonstrated in a study in healthy subjects. PB006 demonstrated clinical efficacy similar to that of reference natalizumab in patients with RRMS, and was generally well tolerated in this population. The tolerability, safety and immunogenicity profiles of PB006 were similar to those of reference natalizumab, and switching from reference natalizumab to PB006 appeared to have no impact on tolerability or immunogenicity. The role of reference natalizumab in the management of RRMS is well established and PB006 provides an effective biosimilar alternative for patients requiring natalizumab therapy.


Subject(s)
Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals , Multiple Sclerosis, Relapsing-Remitting , Natalizumab , Natalizumab/therapeutic use , Natalizumab/adverse effects , Humans , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/therapeutic use , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/pharmacokinetics , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/adverse effects , Multiple Sclerosis, Relapsing-Remitting/drug therapy
8.
Int J Mol Sci ; 25(7)2024 Apr 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38612751

ABSTRACT

The binding activity of various trastuzumab biosimilars versus the branded trastuzumab towards the glycosylated extracellular domain of the human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) target in the presence of pertuzumab was investigated. We employed size exclusion chromatography with tetra-detection methodology to simultaneously determine absolute molecular weight, concentration, molecular size, and intrinsic viscosity. All trastuzumab molecules in solution exhibit analogous behavior in their binary action towards HER2 regardless of the order of addition of trastuzumab/pertuzumab. This analogous behavior of all trastuzumab molecules, including biosimilars, highlights the robustness and consistency of their binding activity towards HER2. Furthermore, the addition of HER2 to a mixture of trastuzumab and pertuzumab leads to increased formation of high-order HER2 complexes, up to concentrations of one order of magnitude higher than in the case of sequential addition. The observed increase suggests a potential synergistic effect between these antibodies, which could enhance their therapeutic efficacy in HER2-positive cancers. These findings underscore the importance of understanding the complex interplay between therapeutic antibodies and their target antigens, providing valuable insights for the development of more effective treatment strategies.


Subject(s)
Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals , Neoplasms , Humans , Trastuzumab/pharmacology , Trastuzumab/therapeutic use , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/pharmacology , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/pharmacology , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Chromatography, Gel
9.
Ann Intern Med ; 177(5_Supplement): S82-S90, 2024 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38621248

ABSTRACT

Many patients with rheumatologic conditions receive care from physicians other than rheumatologists. Here we note key findings from 6 studies in rheumatology published in 2023 that offer valuable insights for internal medicine specialists and subspecialists outside of rheumatology. The first study investigated the effect of low-dose glucocorticoids on patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) over 2 years and challenged existing perceptions about the risks of glucocorticoids in this setting. The second study focused on the updated guideline for preventing and treating glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis. With the chronic and widespread use of glucocorticoids, the American College of Rheumatology emphasized the importance of assessing fracture risk and initiating pharmacologic therapy when appropriate. The third study explored the potential use of methotrexate in treating inflammatory hand osteoarthritis, suggesting a novel approach to managing this challenging and common condition. The results of the fourth article we highlight suggest that sarilumab has promise as an adjunct treatment of polymyalgia rheumatica relapse during glucocorticoid dosage tapering. The fifth study evaluated sublingual cyclobenzaprine for fibromyalgia treatment, noting both potential benefits and risks. Finally, the sixth article is a systematic review and meta-analysis that assessed the therapeutic equivalence of biosimilars and reference biologics in the treatment of patients with RA. Knowledge of this recent literature will be useful to clinicians regardless of specialty who care for patients with these commonly encountered conditions.


Subject(s)
Glucocorticoids , Humans , Glucocorticoids/therapeutic use , Glucocorticoids/adverse effects , Glucocorticoids/administration & dosage , Osteoporosis/drug therapy , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/drug therapy , Antirheumatic Agents/therapeutic use , Antirheumatic Agents/adverse effects , Methotrexate/therapeutic use , Methotrexate/adverse effects , Rheumatology/standards , Rheumatic Diseases/drug therapy , Rheumatic Diseases/complications , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/therapeutic use , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/adverse effects , Polymyalgia Rheumatica/drug therapy , Fibromyalgia/drug therapy
10.
Aliment Pharmacol Ther ; 59(12): 1510-1520, 2024 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38644588

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Data on cost-effectiveness of first-line infliximab in paediatric patients with Crohn's disease are limited. Since biologics are increasingly prescribed and accompanied by high costs, this knowledge gap needs to be addressed. AIM: To investigate the cost-effectiveness of first-line infliximab compared to conventional treatment in children with moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease. METHODS: We included patients from the Top-down Infliximab Study in Kids with Crohn's disease randomised controlled trial. Children with newly diagnosed moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease were treated with azathioprine maintenance and either five induction infliximab (biosimilar) infusions or conventional induction treatment (exclusive enteral nutrition or corticosteroids). Direct healthcare consumption and costs were obtained per patient until week 104. This included data on outpatient hospital visits, hospital admissions, drug costs, endoscopies and surgeries. The primary health outcome was the odds ratio of being in clinical remission (weighted paediatric Crohn's disease activity index<12.5) during 104 weeks. RESULTS: We included 89 patients (44 in the first-line infliximab group and 45 in the conventional treatment group). Mean direct healthcare costs per patient were €36,784 for first-line infliximab treatment and €36,874 for conventional treatment over 2 years (p = 0.981). The odds ratio of first-line infliximab versus conventional treatment to be in clinical remission over 104 weeks was 1.56 (95%CI 1.03-2.35, p = 0.036). CONCLUSIONS: First-line infliximab treatment resulted in higher odds of being in clinical remission without being more expensive, making it the dominant strategy over conventional treatment in the first 2 years after diagnosis in children with moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02517684.


Subject(s)
Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Crohn Disease , Gastrointestinal Agents , Infliximab , Humans , Crohn Disease/drug therapy , Crohn Disease/economics , Infliximab/economics , Infliximab/therapeutic use , Male , Female , Child , Adolescent , Gastrointestinal Agents/economics , Gastrointestinal Agents/therapeutic use , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/economics , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/therapeutic use , Treatment Outcome , Azathioprine/therapeutic use , Azathioprine/economics , Immunosuppressive Agents/economics , Immunosuppressive Agents/therapeutic use , Adrenal Cortex Hormones/therapeutic use , Adrenal Cortex Hormones/economics , Adrenal Cortex Hormones/administration & dosage , Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data
11.
PLoS One ; 19(3): e0300474, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38489305

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In Vietnam, trastuzumab is included in social health insurance's benefits package with a reimbursement rate of 60%, but policymakers have been concerned about its cost-effectiveness. The research aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of one-year adjuvant trastuzumab therapy for early-stage breast cancer patients with human epidermal growth receptor 2 (HER2+) from a societal perspective. METHOD: A Markov model was developed and validated to estimate the lifetime cost and effectiveness (using life year and quality-adjusted life year) of one-year adjuvant trastuzumab therapy compared to chemotherapy (using paclitaxel) alone. Treatment efficacy and transition probabilities were estimated based on published trials (i.e., N9831, NSABP B-31, HERA, and BCIRG 006). Local cost and utility data were employed to capture the Vietnam context. One-way sensitivity analysis, probabilistic sensitivity analysis, threshold, and scenario analysis were also performed. RESULTS: One-year adjuvant trastuzumab therapy combined with chemotherapy compared to chemotherapy alone yielded an additional cost of 888,453,971VND (39,062 US$) with an additional 3.09 LYs and 1.61 QALYs, resulting in an ICER of 287,390,682 VND (12,635 US$) per LY gained, or 519,616,972 VND (22,845 US$) per QALY gained. The ICER exceeds the cost-effective threshold of 1- and 3-time GDP per capita by 6.3 and 2.1 times. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis shows similar results. According to one-way sensitivity analysis, ICERs were driven mainly by transition probabilities and trastuzumab price. One-year adjuvant trastuzumab therapy would be cost-effective at the 3-time GDP per capita threshold if the cost of Herceptin 150mg and 450mg vials were reduced by 56% and 54%, correspondingly. CONCLUSION: In Vietnam, one-year adjuvant trastuzumab therapy for early-stage breast cancer with HER2+ is not cost-effective. The research provided reliable and updated evidence to support policymakers in revising the health insurance benefit package. The policymakers should consider the options to reduce the cost of trastuzumab (e.g., regarding the use of trastuzumab biosimilars, price negotiation options, and options of optimizing the use of Herceptin vials among concurrent hospitalized breast cancer patients).


Subject(s)
Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals , Breast Neoplasms , Humans , Female , Trastuzumab/therapeutic use , Breast Neoplasms/drug therapy , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/therapeutic use , Vietnam , Receptor, ErbB-2 , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Chemotherapy, Adjuvant , Quality-Adjusted Life Years
12.
FASEB J ; 38(5): e23536, 2024 Mar 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38470360

ABSTRACT

Rituximab, the first monoclonal antibody approved for the treatment of lymphoma, eventually became one of the most popular and versatile drugs ever in terms of clinical application and revenue. Since its patent expiration, and consequently, the loss of exclusivity of the original biologic, its repurposing as an off-label drug has increased dramatically, propelled by the development and commercialization of its many biosimilars. Currently, rituximab is prescribed worldwide to treat a vast range of autoimmune diseases mediated by B cells. Here, we present a comprehensive overview of rituximab repurposing in 115 autoimmune diseases across 17 medical specialties, sourced from over 1530 publications. Our work highlights the extent of its off-label use and clinical benefits, underlining the success of rituximab repurposing for both common and orphan immune-related diseases. We discuss the scientific mechanism associated with its clinical efficacy and provide additional indications for which rituximab could be investigated. Our study presents rituximab as a flagship example of drug repurposing owing to its central role in targeting cluster of differentiate 20 positive (CD20) B cells in 115 autoimmune diseases.


Subject(s)
Autoimmune Diseases , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals , Humans , Rituximab/therapeutic use , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/therapeutic use , Drug Repositioning , Off-Label Use , Autoimmune Diseases/drug therapy , Rare Diseases
13.
JAMA Health Forum ; 5(3): e235429, 2024 Mar 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38551589

ABSTRACT

Importance: Biologic drugs account for a growing share of US pharmaceutical spending. Competition from follow-on biosimilar products (subsequent versions that have no clinically meaningful differences from the original biologic) has led to modest reductions in US health care spending, but these savings may not translate to lower out-of-pocket (OOP) costs for patients. Objective: To investigate whether biosimilar competition is associated with lower OOP spending for patients using biologics. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used a national commercial claims database (Optum Clinformatics Data Mart) to identify outpatient claims for 1 of 7 clinician-administered biologics (filgrastim, infliximab, pegfilgrastim, epoetin alfa, bevacizumab, rituximab, and trastuzumab) from January 2009 through March 2022. Claims by commercially insured patients younger than 65 years were included. Exposure: Year relative to first biosimilar availability and use of original or biosimilar version. Main Outcomes and Measures: Patients' annual OOP spending on biologics for each calendar year was determined, and OOP spending per claim between reference biologic and biosimilar versions was compared. Two-part regression models assessed for differences in OOP spending, adjusting for patient and clinical characteristics (age, sex, US Census region, health plan type, diagnosis, and place of service) and year relative to initial biosimilar entry. Results: Over 1.7 million claims from 190 364 individuals (median [IQR] age, 53 [42-59] years; 58.3% females) who used at least 1 of the 7 biologics between 2009 and 2022 were included in the analysis. Over 251 566 patient-years of observation, annual OOP costs increased before and after biosimilar availability. Two years after the start of biosimilar competition, the adjusted odds ratio of nonzero annual OOP spending was 1.08 (95% CI, 1.04-1.12; P < .001) and average nonzero annual spending was 12% higher (95% CI, 10%-14%; P < .001) compared with the year before biosimilar competition. After biosimilars became available, claims for biosimilars were more likely than reference biologics to have nonzero OOP costs (adjusted odds ratio, 1.13 [95% CI, 1.11-1.16]; P < .001) but had 8% lower mean nonzero OOP costs (adjusted mean ratio, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.90-0.93; P < .001). Findings varied by drug. Conclusions and Relevance: Findings of this cohort study suggest that biosimilar competition was not consistently associated with lower OOP costs for commercially insured outpatients, highlighting the need for targeted policy interventions to ensure that the savings generated from biosimilar competition translate into increased affordability for patients who need biologics.


Subject(s)
Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals , Pharmacy , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Male , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/therapeutic use , Health Expenditures , Cohort Studies , Costs and Cost Analysis , Biological Factors
16.
Curr Oncol ; 31(3): 1633-1644, 2024 03 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38534957

ABSTRACT

Background: Ontario publicly funds reference trastuzumab (Herceptin) and four biosimilar trastuzumab products for adjuvant treatment of HER2+ breast cancer. We assessed the real-world safety and effectiveness of biosimilar trastuzumab compared to Herceptin for adjuvant treatment of patients with HER2+ breast cancer. Methods: This was a population-based, retrospective study comparing the safety and effectiveness of biosimilar trastuzumab and Herceptin for neoadjuvant/adjuvant treatment of HER2+ breast cancer from 2016 to 2021. Treatment patients started biosimilar trastuzumab from November 2019 to June 2021; historical comparator patients started Herceptin from June 2016 to October 2019. Safety outcomes death within 30 days of last dose of trastuzumab, direct hospitalization, emergency department visit leading to hospitalization, early treatment discontinuation, and in-patient admission for congestive heart failure were measured using logistic/negative binomial regression. Overall survival (OS) was measured using Kaplan-Meier methods and Cox proportional hazards regression. Propensity score matching was applied. Results: From June 2016 to 2021, 5071 patients with breast cancer were treated with neoadjuvant/adjuvant trastuzumab. The rate of direct hospitalization (RR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.74-0.98, p-value: 0.032) was significantly lower in biosimilar compared to Herceptin patients. OS (log-rank test p = 0.98) and risk of mortality (HR: 1.29, 95% CI: 0.72-2.30, p-value = 0.39) did not significantly differ between treatment groups. Conclusions: Biosimilar trastuzumab demonstrated similar safety and effectiveness to Herceptin. The findings can help improve confidence in and use of biosimilars and demonstrate the value of real-world evidence generation for supporting biosimilar implementations and reassessments.


Subject(s)
Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals , Breast Neoplasms , Female , Humans , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/therapeutic use , Breast Neoplasms/drug therapy , Neoadjuvant Therapy , Retrospective Studies , Trastuzumab/therapeutic use
17.
Adv Ther ; 41(5): 1775-1794, 2024 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38466559

ABSTRACT

Adalimumab (ADL, Humira®, reference product), an anti-TNF-α biologic, has transformed the treatment of chronic, immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. However, the high cost of ADL therapy has driven the development of more affordable ADL biosimilars, agents with no clinically meaningful differences from the reference product. This review summarizes the product attributes of reference ADL and the nine ADL biosimilars approved and available in the USA in relation to patient experience of injection-site pain (ISP). Product formulation, delivery volume and device features (e.g., type and needle gauge size) influence patient experience of ISP with potential clinical consequences. Citrate-free formulations generally cause less ISP; injection volumes of > 1.5 ml may be associated with increased ISP. Reference ADL and all ADL biosimilars offer a citrate-free formulation, and reference ADL and four ADL biosimilars offer a high-concentration solution that allows a smaller injection volume. All available ADL products are injected subcutaneously using either a pre-filled pen (PFP) or pre-filled syringe (PFS). Patients prefer the PFP, but the PFS permits better control over the speed and duration of injection. Smaller (29-gauge) needle outer diameter is associated with less ISP; reference ADL and seven ADL biosimilars offer a device with a 29-gauge needle. In the USA, an approved biosimilar can be designated "interchangeable," allowing pharmacy-level substitution, where state law permits. In the USA, two ADL biosimilars have received interchangeability designation; others are seeking interchangeability designation from the Food and Drug Administration (n = 2), are being evaluated in clinical studies to support interchangeability (n = 2), or do not have/are not seeking interchangeability designation (n = 3). Product-related attributes influence patient experience of ISP caused by subcutaneous ADL injection. Reference ADL and ADL biosimilar products differ in their attributes, so discussion with patients about treatment options is essential to optimize adherence and outcomes.


Subject(s)
Adalimumab , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/therapeutic use , Humans , Injections, Subcutaneous , Injection Site Reaction
18.
Adv Ther ; 41(5): 1795-1814, 2024 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38514505

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Hyrimoz®, (GP2017 [SDZ-ADL]), is a biosimilar to Humira® (REF-ADL). SDZ-ADL was approved in 2018 by both the United States Food and Drug Administration (US FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) for the indications of REF-ADL not protected by orphan exclusivity. In 2023, the US FDA and EMA also approved a citrate-free high-concentration formulation (HCF) of SDZ-ADL. TOTALITY OF EVIDENCE-THE APPROACH: Approval of SDZ-ADL was based on data gathered using the US FDA, EMA and World Health Organization (WHO)-recommended step-wise Totality of Evidence approach. This approach is a robust dataset confirming high confidence in analytical, functional, pharmacokinetic (PK) and clinical biosimilarity between the biosimilar and reference medicine determined through analytical and clinical investigation. EVIDENCE OF BIOSIMILARITY: Evidence supporting the biosimilarity of SDZ-ADL and REF-ADL was reported at each stage of investigation. Comprehensive comparative analytical and functional assessments demonstrated that SDZ-ADL was analytically indistinguishable from REF-ADL in required critical quality attributes, including receptor binding. Phase I clinical data showed PK similarity of SDZ-ADL and REF-ADL in healthy volunteers, with similar safety, tolerability and immunogenicity profiles. Phase III confirmatory efficacy and safety studies, ADACCESS (included in US/EU dossiers) and ADMYRA (separate to US/EU dossiers), both confirmed that SDZ-ADL's efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity matched REF-ADL in all patient groups with no clinically meaningful differences. More recently, this data package was the basis for a citrate-free HCF of SDZ-ADL to be developed, and its PK, safety and immunogenicity were confirmed against the initially approved formulation of SDZ-ADL. CONCLUSION: Overall, the Totality of Evidence provided for biosimilar adalimumab, SDZ-ADL, confirmed the analytical, functional and clinical similarity of SDZ-ADL to REF-ADL, supporting its regulatory approval and providing a data bridge with which to evaluate and support the approval of citrate-free HCF SDZ-ADL for clinical use.


A biosimilar is a type of medicine that is designed to match the structure and function of a 'reference' biologic medicine. Hyrimoz® (SDZ-ADL) is a biosimilar of the adalimumab reference medicine, Humira® ([REF-ADL]). SDZ-ADL was approved in the US and Europe in 2018. For SDZ-ADL to be approved, a collection of evidence needed to be created, called the 'Totality of Evidence.' The purpose of this collection of data is to show there is a high confidence that the new biosimilar medicine matches the reference medicine, from the structure of the medicine to the effect of the medicine on the human body. For SDZ-ADL, this investigation started with comparing the physical structure and other functional properties of SDZ-ADL versus REF-ADL and ended with clinical studies in both healthy volunteers and in patients with diseases treated with adalimumab. This Totality of Evidence gathered for biosimilar adalimumab, SDZ-ADL, confirmed the similarity of SDZ-ADL to REF-ADL and therefore supported the approval of SDZ-ADL. In 2018, a citrate-free high-concentration version (high concentration formulation [HCF]) of REF-ADL was launched that matched REF-ADL. HCF REF-ADL has since become the primary formulation of REF-ADL used in practice. In 2023, a HCF version of SDZ-ADL was also approved in the US and EU based on evidence confirming that HCF SDZ-ADL matched SDZ-ADL. As SDZ-ADL had been previously confirmed to match the reference medicine, this meant that HCF SDZ-ADL could be directly compared against SDZ-ADL to confirm biosimilarity and support its approval.


Subject(s)
Adalimumab , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals , Drug Approval , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/therapeutic use , Humans , Adalimumab/therapeutic use , United States , United States Food and Drug Administration , Antirheumatic Agents/therapeutic use , Antirheumatic Agents/pharmacokinetics
19.
BioDrugs ; 38(3): 405-423, 2024 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38472644

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Hesitation about using biosimilars still exists among healthcare professionals (HCPs), despite extensive experience with their use. Globally, several health organisations and societies from various specialties have issued biosimilar position statements to guide the use of biosimilars in their specialties. However, it is uncertain how similar or different their positions or recommendations are or whether these positions have evolved with the increased experience and availability of new evidence. OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to describe and assess the recommendations of published position statements regarding several aspects of biosimilars across specialties and determine whether these positions have changed with the emergence of new evidence. METHODS: We systematically searched for published position statements of biosimilars in online databases and included statements written in English. The search was from the inception of the databases until May 2023. Two reviewers independently extracted the data. Only position statements that included recommendations to guide the use of biosimilars in clinical practice and were issued by health organisations and societies, including expert panels, were included. We synthesised recommendations on five aspects: prescribing practice, extrapolation of indication, interchangeability, treatment initiation with biosimilars in biologic-naïve patients, and pharmacovigilance. RESULTS: The review included 25 papers involving eight specialties, 16 of which were from European countries, 1 from an international organisation representing 49 countries, and 6 from various countries. The papers were published between 2009 and 2020, with 19 published between 2015 and 2020. Of the five aspects of biosimilars assessed, nearly half (11 of 25) of the papers at the time they were published did not base their positions on a scientific or evidence-based approach. Only 4 of the 25 position papers were identified as revisions of their previous papers. With increasing experience in biosimilars and the emergence of new evidence, about 60% (16 of 25) of the papers contained outdated recommendations, particularly on two aspects. They were extrapolations of indications and interchangeability (including switching). The recommendations for most papers for three other aspects were still appropriate. These were prescribing biosimilars by their brand name and active ingredient, initiating treatment with biosimilars in biologic-naïve patients, and monitoring the long-term safety of biosimilars through pharmacovigilance. For four of the revised papers, their position evolved from opposing indication extrapolation for biosimilars to accepting it, while the position of two papers shifted from not recommending biosimilar switching to permitting the practice. Meanwhile, most papers were against automatic substitution by pharmacists because the evidence for this practice was still limited. CONCLUSIONS: Across specialties, the variability among the position statements is seen for extrapolation of indications for biosimilars and interchangeability (including switching). This requires a revision, considering the latest evidence and growing experience with the use of biosimilars in extrapolated indications and with switching.


Subject(s)
Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/therapeutic use , Humans , Pharmacovigilance , Practice Guidelines as Topic
20.
BioDrugs ; 38(3): 331-339, 2024 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38520607

ABSTRACT

As of 31 December, 2023, 31 observational studies have been published, including a total of 6081 patients who underwent a switch from one biosimilar to another biosimilar of the same reference biologic. Most studies evaluated infliximab, while a smaller number evaluated adalimumab, rituximab or etanercept. Indications studied now include sarcoidosis, as well as the indications previously reported of rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, axial spondyloarthritis/ankylosing spondylitis and inflammatory bowel disease (Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis). This updated data set includes eight additional studies and 2386 more patients compared with those included in an earlier systematic review of biosimilar-to-biosimilar switching. In addition, since the earlier systematic review was published in 2022, the European Medicines Agency has stated that reference-to-biosimilar and biosimilar-to-biosimilar switching in the European Union is safe and efficacy remains unchanged after switching. Furthermore, following a review of the available evidence, the US Food and Drug Administration has confirmed that initial safety and immunogenicity concerns related to biosimilar switching are unfounded and that no differences are observed in efficacy, safety or immunogenicity following one or more switches. The availability of this new efficacy and safety data together with the supportive statements from the European Medicines Agency and the Food and Drug Administration re-confirm the conclusion that as a scientific matter, biosimilar-to-biosimilar switching is an effective clinical practice, with no new safety concerns. Any suggestions to the contrary are not supported by the evidence.


Subject(s)
Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals , Drug Substitution , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/therapeutic use , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/adverse effects , Humans , Infliximab/therapeutic use , United States , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/drug therapy , Adalimumab/therapeutic use , Adalimumab/administration & dosage , Etanercept/therapeutic use , Antirheumatic Agents/therapeutic use , Antirheumatic Agents/adverse effects , Antirheumatic Agents/administration & dosage , United States Food and Drug Administration
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...