RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Ustekinumab (UST) is an interleukin-12/interleukin-23 receptor antagonist recently approved for treating ulcerative colitis (UC) but with limited real-world data. Therefore, we evaluated the effectiveness and safety of UST in patients with UC in a real-world setting. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This is a multicenter, retrospective, observational cohort study. The primary endpoints were the clinical remission rate (partial Mayo score, PMS, ≤1) and the safety of UST. Other endpoints were corticosteroid-free remission (CSFR) rate, clinical response rate (PMS reduction of at least 2 points), and fecal calprotectin (FC) reduction at week 24. RESULTS: We included 256 consecutive patients with UC (M/F 139/117, median age 52). The clinical remission and clinical response rates at eight weeks were 18.7% (44/235) and 53.2% (125/235), respectively, and 27.6% (42/152) and 61.8% (94/152) at 24 weeks, respectively. At 24 weeks, CSFR was 20.3% (31/152), and FC significantly dropped at week 12 (p = 0.0004) and 24 (p = 0.038). At eight weeks, patients naïve or with one previous biologic treatment showed higher remission (p = 0.002) and clinical >response rates (p = 0.018) than patients previously treated with ≥ 2. Adverse events occurred in six patients (2.3%), whereas four patients (1.6%) underwent colectomy. CONCLUSION: This real-world study shows that UST effectively and safely treats patients with UC.
Asunto(s)
Colitis Ulcerosa , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Colitis Ulcerosa/diagnóstico , Colitis Ulcerosa/tratamiento farmacológico , Ustekinumab/efectos adversos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Inducción de Remisión , Estudios de Cohortes , Corticoesteroides/uso terapéutico , Complejo de Antígeno L1 de Leucocito/uso terapéutico , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Biosimilares Farmacéuticos , Colitis Ulcerosa , Enfermedad de Crohn , Enfermedades Inflamatorias del Intestino , Humanos , Adalimumab/uso terapéutico , Biosimilares Farmacéuticos/uso terapéutico , Estudios Retrospectivos , Enfermedades Inflamatorias del Intestino/tratamiento farmacológico , Colitis Ulcerosa/tratamiento farmacológico , Enfermedad de Crohn/tratamiento farmacológico , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
The approval of adalimumab (ADA) biosimilars for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has reduced the cost of treatment. While several ADA biosimilars are currently available, comparative data on the ADA biosimilar GP2017 (HyrimozTM) and its originator (HumiraTM) in IBD are lacking. We compared the efficacy and safety of GP2017 versus originator in IBD outpatients in an Italian real-life setting. This retrospective analysis enrolled consecutive IBD patients with complete clinical, laboratory, and endoscopic data. Clinical activity was assessed with the Mayo score in ulcerative colitis (UC) and the Harvey-Bradshaw Index in Crohn's disease (CD). The primary endpoints were the induction of remission and the safety of GP2017 versus ADA originator. One hundred and thirty-four patients (30.6% with UC and 69.4% with CD, median age 38 years) were enrolled: 62 (46.3%) patients were treated with GP2017, and 72 (53.7%) with ADA originator; 118 (88.1%) patients were naïve to ADA. Clinical remission was obtained in 105 (78.4%) patients, during a median follow-up of 12 months, 82.3% and 75% in the GP2017 and ADA originator groups, respectively (p = 0.311). Treatment was well tolerated in both groups. This analysis of real-world data suggests that GP2017 and its originator are equivalent in terms of efficacy and safety in patients with IBD.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Adalimumab (ADA) biosimilars have been included into the therapeutic armamentarium of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD); however, comparative data on the efficacy and safety of the different ADA biosimilars after replacing the ADA originator for a non-medical reason remains scarce. We aimed to compare in a real-life setting the efficacy and safety of four ADA biosimilars SB5, APB501, GP2017, and MSB11022 in IBD patients after replacing the originator for a non-medical reason. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective study was performed on consecutive IBD patients, analyzing clinical, laboratory, and endoscopic data. The primary endpoints of the study were maintenance of clinical remission and safety of the different biosimilars. RESULTS: 153 patients were enrolled, 26 with UC and 127 with CD. Clinical remission was maintained in 124 out of 153 (81%) patients after a median (IQR) follow-up of 12 (6-24) months, without any significant difference between the four ADA biosimilars. ADA biosimilars dosage was optimized in five patients (3.3%). Loss of remission was significantly higher in UC patients (10/26 patients, 38.5%) than in CD patients (19/127 patients, 14.9%, p<0.025). Adverse events occurred in 12 (7.9%) patients; the large majority were mild. CONCLUSIONS: No difference in efficacy and safety was found between ADA biosimilars when used to replace the ADA originator for a non-medical reason. However, in UC patients the replacement of ADA originator for this reason should be carefully assessed.
Asunto(s)
Biosimilares Farmacéuticos , Enfermedades Inflamatorias del Intestino , Humanos , Adalimumab , Biosimilares Farmacéuticos/efectos adversos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Enfermedades Inflamatorias del Intestino/tratamiento farmacológico , Italia , Resultado del Tratamiento , Infliximab/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of infliximab biosimilar (IFX) IFX CT-P13 in inducing and maintaining remission in ulcerative colitis (UC) outpatients in Italian primary gastroenterology centers. METHODS: Patients were prospectively assessed at entry, after 8, 12, 24, 36, and therefore 52 weeks. Clinical activity was rated as per the Mayo Score. The primary endpoint was reaching of clinical remission (Mayo Score ≤2). Several secondary endpoints were clinical response to treatment, reaching of mucosal healing (MH), safety of the drug. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients (16 males and 13 females, mean age 45 years, range 35-42 years) were enrolled. Eleven (37.9%) patients had previous exposure to other anti-TNF-α. Clinical remission was present in 78.5% at week 24, and in 100% at 12-month follow-up. Subgroup analysis did not reveal significant differences in clinical remission between IFX-naïve patients and patients switching from originator to IFX biosimilar. A clinical response was observed in 92.3% at week 8, in 50.0% at week 16, in 100% at week 36 and in 100% at 12-month follow-up. MH occurred in 85.7% at week 24, and in 100% at 12-month follow-up Reduction of steroids was achieved in 92.3% at week 8, and in 100% during follow-up. One patient underwent proctocolectomy 3 weeks after starting IFX CT-P13. The median C-reactive protein and calprotectin levels during follow-up were significantly reduced during follow-up. No adverse events were observed during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: IFX CT-P13 seems to be very effective and safe in real-life experience at primary IBD centers.