TNFα inhibitor biosimilar associated with polychondritis. A case-based review.

Relapsing polychondritis (RP) is a rare autoimmune disease characterized by inflammation of the cartilage structures of the body with typical features of auricular chondritis, nasal and ocular inflammation, audio-vestibular damage, as well as respiratory tract manifestations. It is associated with several autoimmune diseases and many other disorders. Tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFα) inhibitors treat many chronic inflammatory disorders. They have proven effective and relatively safe in many clinical trials and observational studies. However, several autoimmune phenomena and paradoxical inflammation have been described with TNFα inhibitors, among them RP. This report presents a 43-year-old man with psoriatic arthritis treated with ABP-501 (Amgevita), an adalimumab (ADA) biosimilar and who developed RP, 8 months after the initiation of the treatment. This, is the first report of RP development during TNFα inhibitors biosimilar. We concluded that rheumatologists dealing with patients treated with TNFα inhibitors (originators or biosimilars), should be aware of several paradoxical reactions which may emerge and RP, is one of them.

Adalimumab and anti-adalimumab LISA-TRACKER immunoassays performance criteria for therapeutic drug monitoring of adalimumab-amgen biosimilar (ABP501).

BACKGROUND: ABP501 is a biosimilar to Reference Adalimumab (HUMIRA®) produced by AMGEN. Adalimumab (ADA) has a marketing authorization for Crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis and other inflammatory or autoimmune diseases. The aim of this study was to evaluate the LISA-TRACKER assays developed by Theradiag (France), for the monitoring of ABP501 and anti-ABP501 antibodies in human serum. RESULTS: 68 ABP501 clinical samples were measured with the LISA TRACKER Duo Adalimumab assay. LISA TRACKER has been validated as suitable for quantification of ABP501 in human serum samples. Accuracy of the LISA-TRACKER was measured using 3 human serum matrices spiked with known levels of biosimilar, 3 levels spanning the dynamic range. Percentages of recovery were ranged from 90 to 120% for biosimilar batch1, and between 93 and 105% for biosimilar batch2. The acceptance criteria (CV < 20%) were met for intra-run (from 3.8 to 16.5%) and inter-run imprecision (from 4.4 to 13.9%) including the two batches. All results were comprised within ± 20% from results, obtained with the kit and sample unexposed in order to evaluate stability of the sample, stability of the kit and consistency of the results. In any case, but two, all percentages of inhibition were > 50% for specificity. Specificity was tested with Biosimilar spiked samples, Biosimilar with Humira® spiked samples, and clinical samples from patients treated with adalimumab biosimilar. All of these samples were spiked with polyclonal antibodies directed against Humira®. Specificity inhibition and specificity detection steps were also part of the validation parameters. Reagents made with ABP501 gave similar results than reagents made with Humira® meeting acceptance criteria. CONCLUSIONS: LISA-TRACKER ADA and anti-ADA assays are reliable for the monitoring of patients treated with ABP501.

Clinical similarity of biosimilar ABP 501 to adalimumab in the treatment of patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis: A randomized, double-blind, multicenter, phase III study.

BACKGROUND: ABP 501 is a biosimilar of adalimumab. OBJECTIVE: We sought to compare the efficacy and safety of ABP 501 with adalimumab. METHODS: This 52-week, double-blind study randomized patients with moderate to severe psoriasis to ABP 501 or adalimumab. At week 16, those with 50% or more improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score from baseline on ABP 501 continued the same treatment, whereas adalimumab-treated patients were rerandomized to adalimumab or ABP 501. Clinical similarity in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index percent improvement from baseline to week 16 (primary end point) was established if the point estimate of treatment difference and its 2-sided 95% confidence interval between groups was within equivalence margin of ±15. Patients, including those undergoing a single transition at week 16, were evaluated for safety and immunogenicity. RESULTS: Psoriasis Area and Severity Index percent improvement at week 16 was 80.9 for ABP 501 and 83.1 for adalimumab (least-square mean difference -2.18 [95% confidence interval -7.39 to 3.02]). Adverse events (67.2% [117/174] vs 63.6% [110/173]) and antidrug antibody incidence (55.2% [96/174] vs 63.6% [110/173]) for ABP 501 vs adalimumab were similar. Safety, including immunogenicity, was similar among groups after single transition (week 20). LIMITATIONS: The 52-week data are not reported here. CONCLUSIONS: ABP 501 was shown to be clinically similar to adalimumab. Safety and immunogenicity were not impacted immediately after single transition (adalimumab to ABP 501).

Adalimumab Biosimilar in Pediatric Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Retrospective Study from the Sicilian Network for Inflammatory Bowel Disease (SN-IBD).

BACKGROUND: The utilization of anti-tumor necrosis factor-α (anti-TNF-α) biosimilars in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is constantly increasing. However, pediatric data are limited. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness and safety of adalimumab biosimilar (ADL-BioS) in pediatric IBD patients. METHODS: All consecutive pediatric IBD patients from the Sicilian Network for Inflammatory Bowel Disease cohort treated with ADL-BioS from 2019 to 2021 were recruited. Remission at weeks 14 and 52, treatment persistence, and adverse events were the endpoints of this study. Factors associated with clinical remission and treatment persistence were examined. RESULTS: There were 41 patients in total. Nine (22%) patients were switched from the reference product to ADL-BioS. Two patients had multiple switches. Eleven months was the median follow-up period. Clinical remission was attained by 70.7% and 72.0% of patients on weeks 14 and 52, respectively. Four (9.8%) adverse events occurred (10.1/100 person-year). Treatment persistence was 85.4% at 1 and 2 years. Patients with a longer duration of disease had a higher probability of stopping their treatment (p = 0.036). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first real-world study that particularly addresses the use of ADL-BioS in pediatric IBD. With high rates of treatment persistence and a low frequency of non-serious side effects, ADL-BioS seems to be effective.

Treatment Persistence and Switching Patterns of Adalimumab Biosimilar ABP 501 in European Patients with Rheumatologic Diseases.

INTRODUCTION: ABP 501 was an adalimumab (ADA) biosimilar approved for treating immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) including rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and ankylosing spondylitis (AS). In this retrospective study, we aimed to examine the treatment patterns of ABP 501 among patients with these IMIDs using German and French pharmacy claims databases. METHODS: Patients with RA, PsA, or AS who initiated ABP 501 between October 2018 and March 2020 and were observed continuously for ≥ 365 days both before and after ABP 501 initiation were included. Descriptive analyses of persistence and switch after ABP 501 discontinuation were conducted and reported for each disease cohort by prior use of ADA products (patients naïve to ADA or patients experienced with ADA). RESULTS: Median (95% confidence interval) persistence on ABP 501 was 9.4 (8.6-10.3), 10.2 (9.0-11.7), and 12.1 (11.0-13.1) months in German patients, and 11.7 (9.9-13.3), 7.1 (5.8-8.4), and 10.8 (9.6-11.9) months in French patients for RA, PsA, and AS, respectively. For patients who switched from ABP 501 to another targeted therapy during the first 12 months of follow-up, switching patterns varied between patients naïve to ADA and patients experienced with ADA in both Germany and France, with patients naïve to ADA switching most frequently to other targeted therapies including non-ADA tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi), non-TNFi biologic, or Janus Kinase inhibitor (JAKi) and patients experienced with ADA switching most frequently back to ADA reference product (RP). CONCLUSIONS: Across three rheumatologic diseases, about half of patients persisted on ABP 501 at the end of 12 months after treatment initiation in both Germany and France. Patients experienced with ADA were more likely to switch back to ADA RP, regardless of indication and country, suggesting a possible nocebo effect. Future studies are warranted to understand reasons of discontinuation and switching.

Treatment persistence and switching patterns of ABP 501 in European patients with inflammatory bowel disease.

Background: Approval of the adalimumab (ADA) biosimilar ABP 501 for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) indications was based on the principle of extrapolation, without indication-specific clinical trial data. Objectives: To evaluate the real-world treatment patterns of ABP 501 in patients with IBD. Design: Retrospective analysis of pharmacy claims data from Germany and France. Methods: Continuously insured adult IBD patients who initiated ABP 501 between October 2018 and March 2020 were included. Treatment persistence, adherence, and post-ABP 501 switching patterns were evaluated for two mutually exclusive groups: ADA-naïve patients (i.e. no baseline use of ADA products) and ADA-experienced patients (i.e. previously treated with ADA products). Results: A total of 3362 German patients and 733 French patients were included, with 54.4% and 65.3% being ADA-naïve patients, respectively. Median persistence (95% CI) on ABP 501 was 10.9 months (9.8-11.6) in ADA-naïve patients and 14.2 months (12.7-15.2) in ADA-experienced patients in Germany; for the French cohort, ADA-naïve and -experienced patients had median persistence of 12.8 months (10.2-14.7) and 11.5 months (8.8-14.4), respectively. During the first 12 months of ABP 501 initiation, 53.7% of German patients and 51.0% of French patients were adherent to the therapy. About 20% of patients in both countries switched from ABP 501 to another targeted therapy. In the German cohort, ADA-naïve patients most frequently switched to non-tumor necrosis factor inhibitor biologics, but ADA-experienced patients most commonly switched to reference product (RP); in the French cohort, patients most often switched to RP regardless of prior exposure to ADA products. Conclusion: About 50% of patients persisted on and were adherent to ABP 501 therapy during the first 12 months after treatment initiation in two large European countries. Post-ABP 501, switching patterns varied between countries, indicating diversified treatment practices warranting further research on reason(s) for switching and potential overall treatment outcomes.

Comparison of Performances of Adalimumab Biosimilars SB5, ABP501, GP2017, and MSB11022 in Treating Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: A Real-Life, Multicenter, Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Adalimumab (ADA) biosimilars have entered the therapeutic armamentarium of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), allowing for the treatment of a greater number of patients for their reduced cost than the originator. However, comparative data on the efficacy and safety of the various ADA biosimilars remains scarce.We compare the efficacy and safety of ADA biosimilars SB5, ABP501, GP2017, and MSB11022 in treating IBD outpatients in a real-life Italian setting. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed on consecutive IBD outpatients with complete clinical, laboratory, and endoscopic data. Clinical activity was measured using the Mayo score in ulcerative colitis (UC) and the Harvey-Bradshaw Index in Crohn's disease (CD). The primary endpoints were the following: (1) induction of remission in patients new to biologics and patients new to ADA but previously exposed to other anti-tumor necrosis factor agents or other biologics; (2) maintenance of remission in patients switched from the ADA originator to an ADA biosimilar; and (3) safety of various biosimilars. RESULTS: A total of 533 patients were enrolled according to the inclusion criteria: 162 patients with UC and 371 patients with CD. Clinical remission was obtained in 79.6% of patients new to biologics and 59.2% of patients new to ADA but not to other biologics; clinical remission was maintained in 81.0% of patients switched from the originator, and adverse events were recorded in 6.7% of patients. There was no significant difference between the 4 ADA biosimilars for each predetermined endpoint. CONCLUSIONS: Adalimumab biosimilars are effective and safe in IBD treatment, both in new patients and in patients switched from the ADA originator. No difference in efficacy and safety was found between ADA biosimilars.

We treated 533 IBD patients with adalimumab (ADA) biosimilars SB5, APB501, GP2017, and MSB11022. No differences between these 4 ADA biosimilars were found for reaching remission in naive patients, maintaining remission for nonmedical switching, clinical response, steroid-free remission, surgery rate, mucosal healing, or safety.

Real-life data on efficacy and safety of original Adalimumab and biosimilar Adalimumab (ABP 501) in pediatric rheumatic diseases.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of the original product (OP) and biosimilar product (BP) of adalimumab in pediatric rheumatic diseases. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The study group consisted of patients who had received original or biosimilar adalimumab (ABP 501) therapy for at least 3 months. The patients were divided into uveitis and arthritis groups based on the indication of adalimumab treatment. Assessment of disease activity was performed by Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score in patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis, and by standardization of uveitis nomenclature criteria in patients with uveitis. RESULTS: The study included 140 patients, of which 87 were treated with OP and 53 with BP. In the arthritis group, 26 (63.4%) and 20 (57.1%) patients reached inactive disease according to JADAS-27 in the original and biosimilar adalimumab groups, respectively. In the uveitis group the mean number of exacerbations throughout the treatment period was 0.84 ± 1.07 in the OP group, and 0.58 ± 0.79 in the BP group. There were 71 treatment-emergent adverse events in the OP group and 38 in the BP group. CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference between the biosimilar and the original product in efficacy and safety.

Toward the integration of biosimilars into pediatric rheumatology: adalimumab ABP 501 experience of PeRA research group.

OBJECTIVES: To review the real-life data, to provide an input to the literature concerning treatment of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) with adalimumab (ADL) biosimilar. METHOD: This multi-centric retrospective study was conducted among children with JIA, followed up for at least 24-weeks from the initiation of ADL biosimilar (ABP 501) treatment. Adverse events and alterations in disease activity scores were figured out. RESULTS: The median age of the group was 15.5 (5-18) years. JIA categories were oligoarticular (n =12), enthesitis-related (ERA) (n=24), psoriatic (PsA) (n=6), and polyarticular (n=4). Uveitis was detected at the initiation of the disease (n=3), during the disease course (n=5), or before the diagnosis (n=1). The first-line treatment preferences were ADL biosimilar (n=37) and etanercept (n=9). On the 6th month of ABP 501, 40 (86.9%) patients had achieved complete remission. Six patients (1 PsA, 1 polyarticular JIA, and 4 ERA) had ongoing active arthritis. Furthermore, all except one of the patients had remission of ophthalmologic findings. No life-threatening adverse events were observed. CONCLUSIONS: ABP 501 has a gradual increase in prescription in pediatric rheumatology. Real-life data of the cohort announce that ADL biosimilar is a suitable and effective treatment option for patients with JIA in case of indication.

Adalimumab and ABP 501 in the Treatment of a Large Cohort of Patients with Inflammatory Arthritis: A Real Life Retrospective Analysis.

The recent introduction of ABP 501, an adalimumab biosimilar, in the treatment of rheumatic diseases was supported by a comprehensive comparability exercise with its originator. On the other hand, observational studies comparing adalimumab and ABP 501 in inflammatory arthritis are still lacking. The main aim of this study is to compare the clinical outcomes of the treatment with adalimumab, both the originator and ABP 501, in a large cohort of patients affected by autoimmune arthritis in a real life setting. We retrospectively analysed the baseline characteristics and the retention rate in a cohort of patients who received at least a course of adalimumab (originator or ABP 501) from January 2003 to December 2020. We stratified the study population according to adalimumab use: naive to original (oADA), naive to ABP 501 (bADA) and switched from original to ABP 501 (sADA). The oADA, bADA and sADA groups included, respectively, 724, 129 and 193 patients. In each group, the majority of patients had a diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis. The total observation period was 9805.6 patient-months. The 18-month retentions rate in oADA, bADA and sADA was, respectively, 81.5%, 84.0% and 88.0% (p > 0.05). The factors influencing the adalimumab retention rate were an axial spondylarthritis diagnosis (Hazard Ratio (HR) 0.70; p = 0.04), switch from oADA to ABP 501 (HR 0.53; p = 0.02) and year of prescription (HR 1.04; p = 0.04). In this retrospective study, patients naive to the adalimumab originator and its biosimilar ABP 501 showed the same retention rate. Patients switching from the originator to biosimilar had a higher retention rate, even though not statistically significant, when compared to naive.

Establishing PK Equivalence Between Adalimumab and ABP 501 in the Presence of Antidrug Antibodies Using Population PK Modeling.

PURPOSE: ABP 501 (European Union, adalimumab; United States, adalimumab-atto) is a biosimilar to the adalimumab reference product (RP). A model was developed characterizing population pharmacokinetic (PK) variables of ABP 501 and adalimumab RP to include the impact of antidrug antibodies (ADAs). METHODS: Data were retrospectively analyzed from a single-dose, parallel-group bioequivalence study in healthy adults who received a single 40-mg SC injection of ABP 501 or adalimumab RP. Modeling was performed by using NONMEM 7.2. The impact of ADAs on PK similarity was assessed from population model-based AUC0-∞ values using ANCOVA. FINDINGS: Linear compartment models with various clearance pathways were compared with a one-compartment distribution, first-order subcutaneous absorption model. The final model, a one-compartment model with first-order subcutaneous absorption and linear clearance from the central compartment with an additional time-dependent linear clearance for ADA-positive subjects, described ABP 501 and adalimumab RP population PK variables. Model-derived estimates confirmed PK similarity for ABP 501 and adalimumab RP despite the impact of ADAs. IMPLICATIONS: A traditional approach for evaluating bioequivalence based on noncompartmental analysis may be inappropriate for drugs with a high incidence of ADAs because accounting for the effect of ADAs on noncompartmental analysis parameters is challenging. Use of a population PK model to discern the effect of ADAs on drug PK variables allows for assessment of PK similarity accounting for the presence or absence of ADAs.

A single-centre, observational, retrospective, real-life study evaluating adalimumab biosimilar ABP 501 in the treatment of plaque-type psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis in originator-naïve patients and in patients undergoing non-medical switch from originator.

BACKGROUND: ABP 501 is a biosimilar to the anti-tumor necrosis factor-alfa monoclonal antibody adalimumab and despite its effectiveness and safety in the treatment of psoriasis was demonstrated in randomized clinical trials, no real-life data are available, in particular in patients undergoing non-medical switch from originator to biosimilar. METHODS: We retrospectively searched our clinical records for all patients receiving ABP 501 between March 10, 2019 and September 7, 2019 at our Department. Therefore, we identified 94 patients, 46 patients underwent non-medical switch from adalimumab reference product to ABP 501. RESULTS: In originator-naïve patients, mean PASI significantly improved from baseline to week 24 (p < .0001) in both Pso and PsA cohorts. In these patients, mean DAS-28 ESR improved with no significant differences from baseline. In patients undergoing non-medical switch from adalimumab reference product to ABP 501, no significant difference in PASI or DAS-28 ESR were observed from week 16 before switch to week 24 after switch. CONCLUSIONS: AB- 501 is an effective treatment for plaque-type psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis regardless if patients are originator-naïve or if they were switched from the reference product.

A propensity score-weighted comparison between adalimumab originator and its biosimilars, ABP501 and SB5, in inflammatory bowel disease: a multicenter Italian study.

BACKGROUND: Adalimumab is an effective and safe biological drug for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Nowadays, several biosimilar agents are available, but data regarding their efficacy and safety in patients with IBD are still lacking. We aimed to compare the effectiveness and tolerability between adalimumab originator, ABP501 and SB5 biosimilars in patients with IBD in the short term (after induction and after 6 months of treatment) through a propensity score-weighted multicenter cohort study. METHODS: We included 156 patients with IBD, 69 patients with ulcerative colitis and 87 patients with Crohn's disease (CD) receiving ABP501 or SB5 biosimilars from January 2019 to April 2020 for moderate-to-severe disease. For comparison, a group of age- and sex-matched patients treated with adalimumab originator was used. We collected clinical and biochemical data after induction and at 6 months of treatment. Endoscopic data were recorded only at baseline. RESULTS: Overall, clinical benefit was achieved by 86.4% and 85.3% after induction and at 6 months, respectively, without a statistically significant difference between the three treatment groups (p = 0.68 and p = 0.46). However, after induction, we found significant differences between the two types of the disease (ulcerative colitis or CD, p = 0.004), with a greater clinical benefit achieved by patients with CD. Also, the therapeutic optimization rate between the three drugs was not statistically significant different (p = 0.30). All treatments showed a good safety profile, with only 10 patients who needed to stop therapy because of adverse events. CONCLUSION: Adalimumab biosimilars seem to be as effective and safe as the originator in patients with IBD. Surely, they represent a great opportunity to reduce the costs of biological therapies, however larger and longer real-life studies are necessary.

An open-label extension study to demonstrate long-term safety and efficacy of ABP 501 in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: ABP 501 was evaluated in a phase 3 single-arm, open-label extension (OLE) study to collect additional safety and efficacy data in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Subjects completing the final visit in the parent phase 3 randomized, double-blind, controlled equivalence study comparing the efficacy and safety of the biosimilar ABP 501 with adalimumab reference product (RP) were enrolled in this open-label extension (OLE) study. All subjects received 40 mg ABP 501 every other week for 68 weeks. Key safety endpoints included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), serious adverse events (SAEs), and anti-drug antibody (ADA) incidences. Efficacy endpoints included ACR20 (at least 20% improvement in American College of Rheumatology core set measurements from baseline) and Disease Activity Score 28-joint count C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) change from baseline. RESULTS: Among 466/467 patients treated with ABP 501, 229 transitioned from the ABP 501 arm of the parent study (ABP 501/ABP 501) and 237 from the adalimumab RP arm (RP/ABP 501); 412/467 (88.2%) patients completed the study. The overall TEAE incidence was 63.7% (297/466); grade ≥ 3 TEAE incidence was 9.0% (42/466). The incidence of TEAEs leading to discontinuation of investigational product was 3.6% (17/466). The SAE incidence was 9.9% (46/466). Overall, 18.2% (85/466) of subjects developed binding ADAs and 6.9% (32/466) developed neutralizing ADAs in the OLE study. The ACR20 response rate was 73.3% (340/464 subjects) at OLE baseline, and 78.8% (327/415 subjects) at week 70 of the OLE study. The overall mean DAS28-CRP change from the parent study baseline was - 2.25 at the OLE study baseline (n = 440), - 2.36 at week 4 (n = 463), - 2.41 at week 24 (n = 450), - 2.55 at week 48 (n = 433), and - 2.60 at week 70 (n = 412). Efficacy was maintained throughout the study. CONCLUSIONS: Efficacy previously demonstrated in the parent study was maintained in this OLE study with no new safety findings. Long-term safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy were similar in the ABP 501/ABP 501 and RP/ABP 501 groups. The single switch from RP to ABP 501 did not impact immunogenicity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrial.gov, NCT02114931.

A Review of the Totality of Evidence Supporting the Development of the First Adalimumab Biosimilar ABP 501.

ABP 501 [United States: AMJEVITA™ (adalimumab-atto); European Union: AMGEVITA® (adalimumab)] is the first approved biosimilar to adalimumab [reference product (RP)], a monoclonal antibody (mAb) targeting tumor necrosis factor-alfa (TNF-α). ABP 501 has received approval for use in indications that adalimumab RP is approved for, except those protected by regulatory exclusivity. A systematic step-wise totality of evidence (TOE) approach formed the basis of approval of ABP 501; this involved methodical accumulation of scientifically robust comparative data supporting similarity in analytical, preclinical, and clinical [pharmacokinetics (PK)], efficacy, safety and immunogenicity) evaluations. As a foundational first step, comprehensive analytical assessments demonstrated that ABP 501 is structurally and functionally similar to adalimumab RP in critical quality attributes. Preclinical assessments confirmed similar activity in assessing mechanisms of action and toxicology. Clinical evaluation included a phase 1 PK equivalence study in healthy subjects and two comparative phase 3 studies that evaluated ABP 501 and adalimumab RP in two sensitive patient populations, plaque psoriasis (PsO) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The PK profiles of ABP 501 and adalimumab RP were similar in healthy subjects as well as patients with PsO and RA. The pivotal phase 3 study in patients with PsO demonstrated that ABP 501 was clinically similar to adalimumab RP in terms of efficacy, safety and immunogenicity in both the primary and transition phases. The pivotal phase 3 study in patients with RA also established clinical similarity between ABP 501 and adalimumab RP; an open-label extension of this study demonstrated sustained efficacy over an additional 72 weeks, with no new safety or immunogenicity concerns with ABP 501 treatment. Overall, the TOE supported the conclusion that ABP 501 is highly similar to adalimumab RP and provided scientific justification for extrapolation to all the approved indications of adalimumab RP not protected by exclusivities.Funding: Amgen Inc.

ABP 501 for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis.

INTRODUCTION: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an autoimmune disease, which has a negative impact on the ability to perform activities daily. Tumour necrosis factor α (TNF) is a cytokine with diverse cellular effects, and a key regulator of the inflammatory response. ABP 501 is a biosimilar to adalimumab, a TNF inhibitor. Areas covered: In this review, we examined ABP 501, as a biosimilar candidate to adalimumab in the treatment of RA focusing on the available data. Current data indicate that ABP 501 is a highly similar alternative to adalimumab in terms of safety, efficacy, tolerability and immunogenicity. ABP 501 has already been approved by health authorities in Europe and the United States of America, as a subcutaneous (s.c.) therapy option for the treatment of patients with RA, but also for the full spectrum approved for its bio-originator adalimumab. Expert opinion: Current body of evidence suggests that all biologic activities have been demonstrated to be equivalent between ABP 501 and the originator, including binding rates and affinity to TNF, and also the effector functions such as antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity (ADCC). Therefore, it is fully expected to have same efficacy and safety in all indications.

Scientific and statistical considerations in evaluating the analytical similarity of ABP 501 to adalimumab.

Analytical similarity is the foundation of the totality-of-evidence-based approach for demonstrating that a proposed biosimilar is highly similar to a reference product. This review uses analytical similarity assessment of ABP 501, the first approved adalimumab biosimilar, as a case study to highlight considerations necessary to demonstrate analytical similarity. Similarity assessments start with risk-ranking the critical quality attributes based on scientific understanding of how they impact safety, efficacy, immunogenicity and/or pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics. Testing strategy and evaluation approaches are designed with the understanding of the analytical methods and their capabilities. Statistical considerations are used to establish objective assessment criteria. The result is a scientifically justified, objective analytical similarity assessment that demonstrates that a proposed biosimilar is structurally and functionally similar to a reference product.

Biosimilars in Inflammatory Bowel Disease - Accumulating Clinical Evidence.

INTRODUCTION: Biologic antagonists to tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF- α) are effective medications and have become well established in the treatment of both Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis. Biosimilar medications, which are medications deemed to be equivalent to reference biologic products in terms of clinical effectiveness, safety, pharmacokinetic analysis, and immunogenicity, have now been approved in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) based on indication exploration from clinical data in alternate disease states. Clinicians use these products with caution secondary to lack of clinical experience. Areas Covered: The authors performed a literature search using the following keywords: CT-P13, biosimilar, adalimumab, infliximab, ABP 501, and inflammatory bowel disease. Bibliographies were also reviewed for pertinent articles. Articles pertaining to the clinical efficacy of biosimilars in IBD were included. Expert commentary: The phase 3 trials, which provided the clinical justification to bring TNF- α biosimilars to market, were in rheumatoid arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis; however, new clinical data suggests that biosimilar products have equivalent safety and efficacy to reference products in IBD. This has led to an increased acceptance amongst practicing gastroenterologists and a potential reduction in healthcare costs.