Biosimilar candidate CT-P42 in diabetic macular edema: 24-week results from a randomized, active-controlled, Phase III study.

OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate the therapeutic similarity of CT-P42 compared to reference aflibercept (Eylea®) in adult patients with diabetic macular edema (DME). DESIGN: Randomized, active-controlled, double-masked, Phase III clinical trial PARTICIPANTS: Patients with a diagnosis of either type 1 or 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) with DME involving the center of the macula. METHODS: Patients were randomized (1:1) to receive either CT-P42 or reference aflibercept (2 mg/0.05 mL) by intravitreal injection every 4 weeks (5 doses) then every 8 weeks (4 doses) in the main study period. Results up to Week 24 are reported herein. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary endpoint was mean change from baseline at Week 8 in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart. Equivalence between CT-P42 and reference aflibercept was to be concluded if the two-sided 95% confidence interval (CI) (global assumptions) and two-sided 90% CI (US Food and Drug Administration [FDA] assumptions) for the treatment difference fell entirely within the equivalence margin of ±3 letters, as assessed in the full analysis set. RESULTS: Overall, 348 patients were randomized (CT-P42: 173; reference aflibercept: 175). BCVA improved from baseline to Week 8 in both groups, with a least squares mean (standard error) improvement of 9.43 (0.798) and 8.85 (0.775) letters in the CT-P42 and reference aflibercept groups, respectively. The estimated between-group treatment difference was 0.58 letters, with the CIs within the pre-defined equivalence margin of ±3 letters (95% CI -0.73, 1.88 [global]; 90% CI -0.52, 1.67 [FDA]). Through Week 24, other efficacy results for the two groups, in terms of change in BCVA and retinal central subfield thickness, as well as ETDRS Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale score, supported therapeutic similarity. Pharmacokinetics, usability, safety (including the proportions of patients experiencing at least one treatment-emergent adverse event [CT-P42: 50.3%; reference aflibercept: 53.7%]), and immunogenicity were also comparable between groups. CONCLUSIONS: This study in patients with DME demonstrated equivalence between CT-P42 and reference aflibercept (2 mg/0.05 mL) in terms of efficacy, with similar pharmacokinetic, usability, safety, and immunogenicity profiles.

Serum autoantibodies against hexokinase 1 manifest secondary to diabetic macular edema onset.

AIMS: Autoantibodies against hexokinase 1 (HK1) were recently proposed to be associated with diabetic macular edema (DME). We hypothesized that anti-HK1 autoantibodies can be used as DME markers and to predict DME onset. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Serum from patients with 1) DME, 2) diabetes mellitus (DM), 3) allergies or autoimmunities, and 4) control subjects was tested for anti-HK1 and anti-hexokinase 2 (HK2) autoantibodies by immunoblotting. Patients with DM were prospectively followed for up to nine years, and the association of anti-HK1 antibodies with new-onset DME was evaluated. The vitreous humor was also tested for autoantibodies. RESULTS: Among patients with DME, 32 % were positive for anti-HK1 autoantibodies (42 % of those with underlying type 1 DM and 31 % of those with underlying type 2 DM), and 12 % were positive for anti-HK2 autoantibodies, with only partial overlap of these two groups of patients. Anti-HK1 positive were also 7 % of patients with DM, 6 % of patients with allergies and autoimmunities, and 3 % of control subjects. The latter three groups were anti-HK2 negative. Only one of seven patients with DM who were initially anti-HK1 positive developed DME. CONCLUSIONS: Anti-HK1 autoantibodies can be used as DME markers but fail to predict DME onset.

Biosimilar SB15 versus reference aflibercept in neovascular age-related macular degeneration: 1-year and switching results of a phase 3 clinical trial.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: To evaluate efficacy, safety, pharmacokinetics (PK) and immunogenicity of SB15 versus reference aflibercept (AFL), and switching from AFL to SB15 in neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). DESIGN: Prospective, double-masked, randomised, phase 3 trial. METHODS: Participants with nAMD were randomised 1:1 to receive SB15 (N=224 participants) or AFL (N=225). At week 32, participants either continued on SB15 (SB15/SB15, N=219) or AFL (AFL/AFL, N=108), or switched from AFL to SB15 (AFL/SB15, N=111). This manuscript reports 1-year and switching results of secondary efficacy endpoints such as changes from baseline to week 56 in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central subfield thickness (CST, from internal limiting membrane (ILM) to retinal pigment epithelium), and total retinal thickness (TRT, from ILM to Bruch's membrane). Additional endpoints included safety, PK and immunogenicity. RESULTS: Efficacy results were comparable between groups. The least squares mean (LSmean) change in BCVA from baseline to week 56 was 7.4 letters for SB15/SB15 and 7.0 letters for AFL/AFL (difference (95% CI)=0.4 (-2.5 to 3.2)). The LSmean changes from baseline to week 56 in CST and TRT were -119.2 µm and -132.4 µm for SB15/SB15 and -126.6 µm and -136.3 µm for AFL/AFL, respectively (CST: difference (95% CI)=7.4 µm (-6.11 to 20.96); TRT: difference (95% CI)=3.9 µm (-18.35 to 26.10)). Switched and non-switched participants showed similar LSmean changes in BCVA from baseline to week 56 (AFL/SB15, 7.9 letters vs AFL/AFL, 7.8 letters; difference (95% CI)=0.0 (-2.8 to 2.8)). Safety, PK and immunogenicity were comparable between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Efficacy, safety, PK and immunogenicity were comparable between SB15 and AFL and between switched and non-switched participants.