A Cross-National Comparison of Biosimilars Pricing in Argentina, Australia, Brazil, and Italy.

BACKGROUND: Biosimilar medicines are defined as biological products highly similar to an already licensed biological product (RP). The market entry of biosimilars is expected to reduce the costs of biological treatments. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate the range of differences between the prices of biosimilars and the corresponding RP for biologicals approved in four countries. METHOD: This is a cross-national comparison of pricing of biosimilars in Argentina, Australia, Brazil, and Italy. The study examined online price databases provided by the national authorities of the investigated countries. Biosimilar price difference was calculated by subtracting the unit price of the biosimilar by the unit price of the RP, and then dividing it by the unit price of the RP. The results were presented as percentage. RESULTS: Brazil had the highest median price reduction (- 36.3%) in biosimilars price, followed by Italy (- 20.0%) and Argentina (- 18.6%). All the biosimilars in Italy were priced below the RP presenting a minimum reduction of 6.3%, while in Australia, most of the prices of biosimilars were equal to the RP. In Argentina, one infliximab-biosimilar displayed price above the RP (40.7%) while the lower priced brand had a reduction of 14.4%. Brazil had four biosimilars with prices above the respective RP, including isophane insulin (1), insulin glargine (1) and somatropin (2). CONCLUSION: The study revealed a marked dispersion in the price's differences between biosimilars and RP across the studied countries. Governments should evaluate whether their policies have been successful in improving affordability of biological therapies.

Lessons learnt from the preclinical discovery and development of ensitrelvir as a COVID-19 therapeutic option.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic stimulated the development of several therapeutic tools with several degrees of success. Ensitrelvir, a protease inhibitor that blocks the replication of SARS-CoV-2, can reduce the viral load and the severity of symptoms in infected patients and become available for emergency use in Japan. Clinical trials showed a good tolerability profile although the potential for interactions with substrates, inhibitors, and inducers of CYP3A must be considered. The occurrence of resistance is also a matter of investigation. AREAS COVERED: In this article, the authors describe the development of ensitrelvir starting from the identification of the molecule to the pre-clinical and clinical trials up to the post-authorization phase. EXPERT OPINION: Ensitrelvir was developed in a late phase of the pandemic when the availability of patients that can be candidate to enter the clinical trial was limited with consequences for the possibility of assessing certain outcomes and for the robustness of results. Although the evidence about the benefits of ensitrelvir in COVID-19 is not questionable, the problems of interactions with other drugs, emerging resistant variants, the availability of alternative therapeutic options, costs, and accessibility will concur to its probable limited clinical use in the future.

Drug Safety and Relevant Issues in the Real-World.

The global impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has underscored the pivotal role of drug safety and effective communication within the realm of pharmacovigilance, particularly in times of unprecedented public health emergencies [...].

Assessing disease activity of rheumatoid arthritis patients and drug-utilization patterns of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in the Tuscany region, Italy.

Introduction: The disease activity associated with the drug-utilization patterns of biologic Disease Modifying Anti-Rheumatic Drugs (DMARDs) is poorly investigated in real-world studies on rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients. To investigate the relationship between biologic DMARD initiation/discontinuations in RA patients identified in the healthcare administrative databases of Tuscany and the Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) reported in the medical charts. Methods: This retrospective population-based study included RA's first-ever biologic DMARD users of the Pisa University Hospital from 2014 to 2016. Patients were followed up until 31 December 2019. We evaluated the DAS28 recorded before (T0) and after (T1) the biologic DMARD initiation and before (TD0) and after (TD1) discontinuations. Patients were classified as "off-target" (DAS28 > 3.2) or "in-target" (DAS28 ≤ 3.2). We described the disease activity trends at initiation and discontinuation. Results: Ninety-five users were included (73 women, mean age 59.6). Among 70 patients (74%) with at least three DAS28 measures, 28 (40.0%) were off-target at T0 and 38 (54.3%) in-target at T1. Thirty-three (47%) patients had at least one discontinuation, among those with at least three DAS28 assessments. In the disease activity trend, disease stability or improvement was observed in 28 out of 37 (75.7%) patients at initiation and in 24 out of 37 (64.9%) at discontinuation. Discussion: Biologic DMARD discontinuations identified in the healthcare administrative databasese of Tuscany are frequently observed in situations of controlled RA disease. Further studies are warranted to confirm that these events can be used in studies using healthcare administrative databases as proxies of treatment effectiveness.

Potential missed diagnoses of Crohn's disease in tertiary care: impact on drug utilization and healthcare facilities use.

BACKGROUND: A missed diagnosis of Crohn's disease (CD) can delay treatment initiation with consequences on disease course. AIMS: To measure the possible impact of missed diagnoses on drug utilization and access to healthcare facilities in a real-world cohort of CD patients. METHODS: This retrospective observational study has been conducted on the regional administrative databases of Tuscany (Italy). We included patients with a first record of CD diagnosis between 06/11/2011 and 06/30/2016. Possible missed diagnosis (exposure) was defined by hospital presentation for gastrointestinal symptoms consistent with CD diagnosis that occurred in the 7-60 months preceding CD diagnosis. We compared exposed and non-exposed patients by assessing time-free from biologic drugs and from Emergency Department (ED) or hospital access. Hazard ratio (HR) was calculated using Cox models. RESULTS: Among 3342 CD patients, 584 (17.5%) had a possible missed diagnosis. A risk of being treated with biologic drugs [adjusted HR (aHR): 2.17, 95% CI: 1.75-2.71] and of access to ED or hospitalization (aHR: 1.59, 95% CI: 1.44-1.75) was observed in patients with a possible missed diagnosis as compared to those without. CONCLUSION: Tertiary care caregivers should be trained in the identification of early CD symptoms, to timely identify CD diagnosis and optimize pharmacological treatment and disease management.

Biosimilars approvals by thirteen regulatory authorities: A cross-national comparison.

Biosimilars are biological medicines highly similar to a previously licensed reference product and their licensing is expected to improve access to biological therapies. This study aims to present an overview of biosimilars approval by thirteen regulatory authorities (RA). The study is a cross-national comparison of regulatory decisions involving biosimilars in Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Chile, Canada, Colombia, Europe, Hungary, Guatemala, Italy, Mexico, Peru and United States. We examined publicly available documents containing information regarding the approval of biosimilars and investigated the publication of public assessment reports for registration applications, guidelines for biosimilars licensing, and products approved. Data extraction was conducted by a network of researchers and regulatory experts. All the RA had issued guidance documents establishing the requirements for the licensing of biosimilars. However, only three RA had published public assessment reports for registration applications. In total, the investigated jurisdictions had from 19 to 78 biosimilars approved, most of them licensed from 2018 to 2020. In spite of the advance in the number of products in recent years, some challenges still persist. Limited access to information regarding the assessment of biosimilars by RA can affect confidence, which may ultimately impact adoption of these products in practice.

Drug-Utilization, Healthcare Facilities Accesses and Costs of the First Generation of JAK Inhibitors in Rheumatoid Arthritis.

This study is aimed at describing tofacitinib and baricitinib users by characterizing their prescription and healthcare histories, drug and healthcare utilization patterns, and direct costs from a healthcare system perspective. This retrospective cohort study was performed using Tuscan administrative healthcare databases, which selected two groups of Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) incident users (index date) from 1st January 2018 to 31 December 2019 and from 1 January 2018 to 30 June 2019. We included patients ≥18 years old, at least 10 years of data, and six months of follow-up. In the first analysis, we describe mean time, standard deviation (SD), from the first-ever disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) to the JAKi, and costs of healthcare facilities and drugs in the 5 years preceding the index date. In the second analysis, we assessed Emergency Department (ED) accesses and hospitalizations for any causes, visits, and costs in the follow-up. In the first analysis, 363 incident JAKi users were included (mean age 61.5, SD 13.6; females 80.7%, baricitinib 78.5%, tofacitinib 21.5%). The time to the first JAKi was 7.2 years (SD 3.3). The mean costs from the fifth to the second year before JAKi increased from 4325 € (0; 24,265) to 5259 € (0; 41,630) per patient/year, driven by hospitalizations. We included 221 incident JAKi users in the second analysis. We observed 109 ED accesses, 39 hospitalizations, and 64 visits. Injury and poisoning (18.3%) and skin (13.8%) caused ED accesses, and cardiovascular (69.2%) and musculoskeletal (64.1%) caused hospitalizations. The mean costs were 4819 € (607.5; 50,493) per patient, mostly due to JAKi. In conclusion, the JAKi introduction in therapy occurred in compliance with RA guidelines and the increase in costs observed could be due to a possible selective prescription.

Tixagevimab + cilgavimab against SARS-CoV-2: the preclinical and clinical development and real-world evidence.

INTRODUCTION: Direct-acting SARS-CoV-2 antiviral monoclonal antibodies have been an integral part of therapeutic strategies against COVID-19 pandemic. The monoclonal strategy was jeopardized by the emergence of new variants and resistant strains, making many monoclonal antibodies quickly obsolete. Nevertheless, a possible strategy consists in the use of antibody cocktails and the development of the cilgavimab + tixagevimab in combination is placed in this context. AREAS COVERED: In this review, we describe the development of the cilgavimab + tixagevimab cocktail, from pre-clinical to real-world evidence. EXPERT OPINION: The pre-clinical and clinical development of cilgavimab + tixagevimab followed a similar path to that of the antibodies developed in the earlier stages of the pandemic. Both antibodies have been developed from convalescent plasma and have been shown to be effective in clinical trials in prophylaxis and in early therapy. This cocktail has found its position in therapy especially in immunocompromised subjects for whom vaccine prevention is not feasible. The cocktail strategy, together with a more stable pandemic situation, could ensure a certain longevity to the drug against resistance, especially when compared with that of other antibodies. Recently emerged Omicron sub-lineages have demonstrated the ability to escape this cocktail's activity and so the future of this treatment could be compromised.

Preclinical discovery and development of the casirivimab + imdevimab cocktail for the treatment of novel coronavirus infection: the rise and fall.

INTRODUCTION: The ongoing COVID19 pandemic represents an unprecedented opportunity to test the feasibility of monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapies against respiratory viruses. While many hurdles were easily predictable (e.g. time to develop, scalability, and economic sustainability), mAb cocktails (i.e. the combination of two mAbs) were finally deployed in 2021, one year after the beginning of the pandemic. Of them, the REGN-COV-2 cocktail was likely the most successful experience and contributed at saving lives at the time of the wave sustained by the Delta variant of concern (VOC). AREAS COVERED: Herein, the authors review the preclinical and clinical history of the casirivimab + imdevimab cocktail for the treatment of novel coronavirus infection. The authors furthermore provide the reader with their perspectives on this cocktail including its current place in the treatment armamentarium. EXPERT OPINION: Unfortunately, results from clinical trials highlighted a very limited efficacy in inpatients; furthermore, the current evidence with regards to its lack of effectiveness against the current dominant VOC (omicron) suggests a very limited use of these drugs in the future. In the authors' opinion, this story reminds us of the limitations of mAb therapies in pandemic settings, and of the inferiority of monoclonal versus polyclonal antibody-based therapeutics in such scenarios.

Trajectories of Adherence to Biologic Disease-Modifying Anti-Rheumatic Drugs in Tuscan Administrative Databases: The Pathfinder Study.

Scanty information on clustering longitudinal real-world data is available in the medical literature about the adherence implementation phase in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). To identify and characterize trajectories by analyzing the implementation phase of adherence to biologic Disease-Modifying Anti-Rheumatic Drugs (DMARDs), we conducted a retrospective cohort drug-utilization study using Tuscan administrative databases. RA patients were identified by a validated algorithm, including the first biologic DMARD supply from 2010 to 2015, RA specialist visit in the year before or after the first supply date and RA diagnosis in the five years before or in the year after the first supply date. We observed users for three years or until death, neoplasia, or pregnancy. We evaluated adherence quarterly through the Medication Possession Ratio. Firstly, we identified adherence trajectories and described the baseline characteristics; then, we focused on the trajectory most populated to distinguish the related sub-trajectories. We identified 952 first ever-biologic DMARD users in RA (712 females, mean age 52.7 years old, standard deviation 18.8). The biologic DMARD mostly supplied was etanercept (387 users) followed by adalimumab (233). Among 935 users with at least 3 adherence values, we identified 49 fully-adherent users, 829 continuous users, and 57 early-discontinuing users. Significant differences were observed among the index drugs. After focusing on the continuous users, three sub-trajectories were identified: continuous-steady users (556), continuous-alternate users (207), and continuous-declining users (66). No relevant differences emerged at the baseline. The majority of first ever-biologic DMARD users showed a continuous adherence behavior in RA. The role of adherence potential predictors and the association with effectiveness and safety outcomes should be explored by further studies.

Validation of algorithms for selecting rheumatoid arthritis patients in the Tuscan healthcare administrative databases.

Validation of algorithms for selecting patients from healthcare administrative databases (HAD) is recommended. This PATHFINDER study section is aimed at testing algorithms to select rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients from Tuscan HAD (THAD) and assessing RA diagnosis time interval between the medical chart date and that of THAD. A population was extracted from THAD. The information of the medical charts at the Rheumatology Unit of Pisa University Hospital represented the reference. We included first ever users of biologic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) between 2014 and 2016 (index date) with at least a specialist visit at the Rheumatology Unit of the Pisa University Hospital recorded from 2013 to the index date. Out of these, we tested four index tests (algorithms): (1) RA according to hospital discharge records or emergency department admissions (ICD-9 code, 714*); (2) RA according to exemption code from co-payment (006); (3) RA according to hospital discharge records or emergency department admissions AND RA according to exemption code from co-payment; (4) RA according to hospital discharge records or emergency department admissions OR RA according to exemption code from co-payment. We estimated sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predicted values (PPV and NPV) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) and the RA diagnosis median time interval (interquartile range, IQR). Two sensitivity analyses were performed. Among 277 reference patients, 103 had RA. The fourth algorithm identified 96 true RA patients, PPV 0.78 (95% CI 0.70-0.85), sensitivity 0.93 (95% CI 0.86-0.97), specificity 0.84 (95% CI 0.78-0.90), and NPV 0.95 (95% CI 0.91-0.98). The sensitivity analyses confirmed performance. The time measured between the actual RA diagnosis date recorded in medical charts and that assumed in THAD was 2.2 years (IQR 0.5-8.4). In conclusion, this validation showed the fourth algorithm as the best. The time interval elapsed between the actual RA diagnosis date in medical charts and that extrapolated from THAD has to be considered in the design of future studies.

An overview of the preclinical discovery and development of bamlanivimab for the treatment of novel coronavirus infection (COVID-19): reasons for limited clinical use and lessons for the future.

Introduction: In the COVID-19 pandemic emergency, research has been oriented toward the development of therapies that could cure critically ill patients and treatments that can reduce the number of hospitalized patients, in order to ease the pressure on health-care systems. Bamlanivimab, developed from human convalescent plasma, was the first monoclonal antibody to become available for emergency use in several countries. Expectations related to its use in COVID-19 patients as a single agent have been largely disregarded, especially against E484K-carrying SARS-CoV-2 variants.Areas covered: In this drug discovery case history, the development of the drug is described starting from the identification and selection of the antibody, from the pre-clinical and clinical trials up to the post-authorization phase.Expert opinion: Bamlanivimab has shown some efficacy in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19. Initially approved as a monotherapy, due to poor efficacy it is currently only usable in combination with etesevimab. Pharmacokinetic limitations and mainly the onset of SARS-CoV-2 variants are the main reasons for this limited clinical use. The use in preventing hospitalization also has ethical limits related to the sustainability of care, especially if, considering similar effectiveness, bamlanivimab is compared with convalescent plasma.

Utilisation patterns and clinical impact of the introduction of infliximab-biosimilar in Tuscany, Italy: real world evidence following the recommendation of switching for non-medical reasons.

OBJECTIVES: This study was aimed at assessing the impact of a non-medical recommendation on drug-utilisation patterns and clinical outcomes in a central Region of Italy (Tuscany). METHODS: We performed a pre-post study on data collected in Tuscan healthcare administrative databases. We included patients with diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis, or psoriatic arthritis, or ankylosing spondylitis, or ulcerative colitis, or Crohn's disease, or psoriasis. The first analysis compared patients treated with infliximab on January 1st, 2013 (originator only available) to those on January 1st, 2016 (both originator and biosimilar available). The second analysis compared infliximab-originator users with infliximab-biosimilar ones. Adjusted odds ratios (OR) of persistence on treatment, Emergency Department (ED) admissions, hospitalisations and specialist visits were calculated. RESULTS: The first analysis included 606 patients and the second 434. In both analyses, we did not observe any significant difference in persistence. In the first analysis, the 2016 infliximab-originator cohort showed a significant association with the risk of having at least one ED admission (OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.31). A significant difference of accessing a specialist visit (more frequently rheumatologic) was observed in the 2016 cohort (OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.05 to 2.20). In the second analysis, the risk of having at least one hospitalisation decreased significantly in switchers to infliximab-biosimilar (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.96). CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed no relevant changes in the clinical outcomes following the introduction of infliximab-biosimilar. The few observed differences observed can be explained mainly by a selective switching to infliximab-biosimilar in patients with lower burden of disease.

Anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing monoclonal antibodies: clinical pipeline.

Monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapy has been previously exploited for viral infections, such as respiratory syncytial virus pneumonia and Ebolavirus disease. In the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, early signals of efficacy from convalescent plasma therapy have encouraged research and development of anti-SARS-CoV-2 mAbs. While many candidates are in preclinical development, we focus here on anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing mAbs (or mAb cocktails) that represent the late-stage clinical pipeline, i.e., those currently in Phase 2 or Phase 3 clinical trials. We describe the structure, mechanism of action, and ongoing trials for VIR-7831, LY-CoV555, LY-CoV016, BGB-DXP593, REGN-COV2, and CT-P59. We speculate also on the next generation of these mAbs.

The Impact of the COVID-19 "Infodemic" on Drug-Utilization Behaviors: Implications for Pharmacovigilance.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic that hit the world in 2020 triggered a massive dissemination of information (an "infodemic") about the disease that was channeled through the print, broadcast, web, and social media. This infodemic also included sensational and distorted information about drugs that likely first influenced opinion leaders and people particularly active on social media and then other people, thus affecting choices by individual patients everywhere. In particular, information has spread about some drugs approved for other indications (chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor antagonists, favipiravir, and umifenovir) that could have led to inappropriate and therefore hazardous use. In this article, we analyze the rationale behind the claims for use of these drugs in COVID-19, the communication about their effects on the disease, the consequences of this communication on people's behavior, and the responses of some influential regulatory authorities in an attempt to minimize the actual or potential risks arising from this behavior. Finally, we discuss the role of pharmacovigilance stakeholders in emergency management and possible strategies to deal with other similar crises in the future.

Exploring pharmacological approaches for managing cytokine storm associated with pneumonia and acute respiratory distress syndrome in COVID-19 patients.

Sars-CoV-2 complications include pneumonia and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), which require intensive care unit admission. These conditions have rapidly overwhelmed healthcare systems, with detrimental effects on the quality of care and increased mortality. Social isolation strategies have been implemented worldwide with the aim of reducing hospital pressure. Among therapeutic strategies, the use of immunomodulating drugs, to improve prognosis, seems promising. Particularly, since pneumonia and ARDS are associated with a cytokine storm, drugs belonging to therapeutic classes as anti-IL-6, anti-TNF, and JAK inhibitors are currently studied. In this article, we discuss the potential advantages of the most promising pharmacological approaches.

Unresolved gustatory, olfactory and auditory adverse drug reactions to antibiotic drugs: a survey of spontaneous reporting to Eudravigilance.

Objectives: Sensory adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are generally expected to be transient in nature. However, spontaneous reports describe frequently these events as long-lasting or unresolved. In this study, the authors reviewed the Eudravigilance publicly accessible database to describe the volume and expectedness of potentially unresolved outcomes for gustatory, olfactory and auditory (GOA) suspected ADRs associated with antibiotics for systemic use.Methods: 'Overall' and 'GOA' suspected ADRs were extracted from Eudravigilance to estimate the distribution of their outcomes among different antibiotic groups. Then, the authors identified the drugs contributing to at least 15% of all suspected GOA ADRs observed for the antibiotic groups, and evaluated the expectedness.Results: The frequency of persistent/permanent outcomes was higher for GOA suspected ADRs, as compared to the overall ones. Unresolved and undetermined outcomes for antibiotic-associated GOA ADRs in Eudravigilance might hide a large number of events with underestimated clinical consequences. Several persistent/permanent antibiotic-associated GOA reactions could be classified as serious and unexpected.Conclusion: Potential long-lasting or irreversible GOA reactions are often reported for all antibiotics drugs. Further studies are warranted to clarify whether this is an actual safety issue or simply it reflects a general difficulty in outcomes assessment for such reactions.

Is There a Risk of Lymphoma Associated With Anti-tumor Necrosis Factor Drugs in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease? A Systematic Review of Observational Studies.

Background: Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) are generally not considered a risk factor for the development of lymphoma. When considering IBD treatments, there is good evidence supporting thiopurines (azathioprine, 6-mercaptopurine) as a risk factor for lymphoma. Conversely, the association between the use of anti-TNF agents and the development of lymphoma remains undetermined. In this systematic review, we analyzed the evidence coming from observational studies supporting an association between the use of anti-TNF drugs and lymphoma in patients with IBDs. Methods: This systematic review was performed according with MOOSE and PRISMA statements. We searched observational studies conducted on IBD patients, using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Google Scholar, published in English language, within the period ranging from January 1st, 1999 to June 30th, 2018. An assessment of the methodologic shortcomings of selected studies was performed as well. Results: Fourteen studies met the eligibility criteria and were included in the review. Only four studies found a significant association of anti-TNF drug with lymphoma or groups of cancers including lymphoma. However, the methodologic shortcomings of all the included studies made their results unreliable, irrespectively of whether their findings supported an association or not. Conclusions: Current evidence from observational studies does not allow excluding or confirming an association of the exposure to anti-TNF treatments with lymphoma in IBD patients.