Utility of real-world evidence in biosimilar development.

Biosimilar development refers to the process of creating a biologic drug that is similar to an existing approved biologic drug, also known as a reference drug. Due to the complex nature of biologics drugs and the inherent variability in their manufacturing process biosimilars are not identical but highly similar to the reference drug in terms of quality, safety, and efficacy. Efficacy and safety trials for biosimilars involve large numbers of patients to confirm comparable clinical performance of the biosimilar and the reference product in appropriately sensitive clinical indications and for appropriate sensitive endpoints. The objective of a biosimilar clinical data is to address slight differences observed at previous steps and to confirm comparable clinical performance of the biosimilar and the reference product. In recent years with advances in big data computing, there has been increasing interest to incorporate the totality of information from different data sources (e.g. Real World data and published literature) in design and conduct of clinical trial to support regulatory objectives. The biosimilar development is an ideal framework for utilization of Real-World Evidence in design of trials as potentially large amount of data are available for the reference dug. Hence there may be an opportunity to use RWD in establishing, improving or validating equivalence margins (EQM) for biosimilar designs, specifically in the case there is no historical published data in the intended sensitive population. In this article, we propose a variation of matching method that seems promising to identify the matched set from a real-world data for which the effect size of targeted endpoint would be comparable to historical data. We believe this is a reasonable approach because in design stage, we can view covariates and secondary endpoints as data feature that can be used in a matching method. This approach was illustrated through a case study which indicated the estimate of the primary endpoint is within 1% of published results and thus RWD may be used to justify or estimate the equivalence margin. To ensure consistent results we recommend using this approach in different indications and endpoint scenarios. Thus utilization of RWD/RWE can provide an important opportunity to increase access to biologic therapies, reducing cost by repurposing existing data.

One-Year Brolucizumab Outcomes in Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration from a Large United States Cohort in the IRIS® Registry.

PURPOSE: To evaluate visual acuity (VA) and injection intervals in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) after 12 months of brolucizumab therapy in clinical practice. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Adults in the United States-based IRIS® Registry (Intelligent Research in Sight) with nAMD who received brolucizumab exclusively for 12 months (2308 eyes of 2079 patients). METHODS: Observational study of eyes with a first injection of brolucizumab (index), followed by 2 or more brolucizumab injections over the following 12 months without switching to another anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agent. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were change in best recorded VA and, for eyes receiving prior anti-VEGF therapy (treatment-experienced eyes), the difference between the brolucizumab injection interval at 12 months and the anti-VEGF injection interval before switching. The interval before switching was defined as the time between the prior anti-VEGF and index brolucizumab injections; brolucizumab interval was the time between the closest injection to day 365 and the preceding injection. Secondary outcomes included incident adverse events. RESULTS: Overall VA at index was 61.6 ± 18.4 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study letters; 83.7% of treatment-naive eyes (184/220) and 86.1% of treatment-experienced eyes (1797/2088) showed stable (< 10 letters gained or lost) or improved (≥ 10 letters gained) VA at 12 months. Among treatment-experienced eyes receiving a prior anti-VEGF injection within 365 days before index, 29.5% (594/2015) showed an interval before switching of 8 weeks or more (mean, 7.6 ± 5.5 weeks), whereas 83.1% (1734/2015) showed a brolucizumab injection interval at 12 months of 8 weeks or more (mean, 10.3 ± 4.0 weeks). In all, 77.1% of treatment-experienced eyes (1554/2015) showed an interval extension of 1 week or more; of these, 55.4% (861/1554) showed an extension of 4 weeks or more. CONCLUSIONS: In this community-based study, at 12 months, brolucizumab treatment prolonged the interval between anti-VEGF injections for most treatment-experienced eyes, particularly those with shorter intervals before switching, while maintaining or improving VA. With careful balancing of the benefits and risks, switching to brolucizumab treatment may offer the advantage of extending the treatment interval for patients with a high anti-VEGF therapy burden. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

Factors Linked to Injection Interval Extension in Eyes with Wet Age-Related Macular Degeneration Switched to Brolucizumab.

PURPOSE: To evaluate factors associated with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) injection interval extension in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) switched to brolucizumab treatment. DESIGN: Retrospective, observational cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Adults in the United States-based IRIS® Registry (Intelligent Research in Sight) with nAMD who switched from another anti-VEGF agent to brolucizumab-only treatment for ≥ 12 months from October 8, 2019, through November 26, 2021. METHODS: Univariable and multivariable analyses examined associations of demographic and clinical characteristics with the likelihood of interval extension after switching to brolucizumab therapy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Eyes were classified as either extenders or nonextenders at 12 months. Extenders were eyes that achieved (1) an extension of ≥ 2 weeks in the brolucizumab injection interval at 12 months versus the interval before switching (time between the last known prior anti-VEGF injection and first [index] brolucizumab injection) and (2) stable (< 10 letters gained or lost) or improved (≥ 10 letters gained) visual acuity (VA) at 12 months versus VA at index injection. RESULTS: Of 2015 eyes among 1890 patients who switched to brolucizumab treatment, 1186 (58.9%) were extenders. In univariable analyses, demographic and clinical characteristics were comparable between extenders and nonextenders, except that extenders had shorter intervals before switching versus nonextenders (mean, 5.9 ± 2.1 weeks vs. 10.1 ± 7.6 weeks, respectively). In multivariable logistic regression modeling, a shorter interval before switching was associated significantly and positively with interval extension with brolucizumab therapy (adjusted odds ratio, 5.6 for interval before switching of < 8 weeks versus ≥ 8 weeks; 95% confidence interval, 4.5-6.9; P < 0.001), and eyes with an index VA of 40 to 65 letters were significantly less likely to be extenders than eyes in the higher (better) index VA categories. CONCLUSIONS: Length of the treatment interval before switching was the characteristic associated most strongly with successful interval extension with brolucizumab. Treatment-experienced patients who required more frequent injections (i.e., shorter intervals before switching) showed the greatest extensions when switching to brolucizumab. With careful consideration of benefits and risks, brolucizumab may be a valuable option for patients with higher treatment burdens because of the need for frequent injections. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.

Switching to brolucizumab: injection intervals and visual, anatomical and safety outcomes at 12 and 18 months in real-world eyes with neovascular age-related macular degeneration.

BACKGROUND: The anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) injection interval influences treatment burden and compliance in neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). This real-world study investigates visual acuity (VA), injection-interval extension, central macular thickness (CMT) and safety in nAMD eyes switched to the anti-VEGF agent brolucizumab and followed for up to 18 months. METHODS: This retrospective study included patients with nAMD who were switched from other anti-VEGF agents to brolucizumab only. Patient eyes were grouped into three nested cohorts with the overall cohort receiving ≥ 1 brolucizumab injection, the second receiving ≥ 3 brolucizumab injections with a follow-up period of ≥ 12 months and the third cohort receiving ≥ 3 brolucizumab injections with a follow-up period of ≥ 18 months. Study endpoints included changes from baseline at 12 or 18 months in VA, injection intervals, and CMT. Sub-group analyses were conducted using baseline injection interval length or baseline VA as qualifiers. RESULTS: Overall, 482 eyes received ≥ 1 brolucizumab injection; 174 eyes received ≥ 3 brolucizumab injections with ≥ 12 months of follow-up, and 95 eyes received ≥ 3 brolucizumab injections with ≥ 18 months of follow-up. VA (mean [95% confidence intervals]) remained stable relative to baseline after 12 months (- 1.1 [- 3.7, 1.6] letters; p = 0.42) and 18 months (0.0 [- 3.1, 3.1] letters; p = 0.98) of brolucizumab treatment, respectively, and pre-switch injection intervals or baseline VA had no notable effect. Following the switch to brolucizumab, injection intervals were extended from baseline to month 12 by 26.9 (19.7, 34.0) days (p < 0.0001), and eyes with pre-switch injection intervals < 8 weeks were able to have their injection intervals extended by 23.6 days longer than eyes with pre-switch injection intervals ≥ 8 weeks. At 18 months, injection intervals were extended by 36.3 (25.6, 46.9) days (p < 0.0001) compared to baseline. Following switch to brolucizumab, CMT was reduced at both 12 and 18 months (12 months: - 35.2 (- 51.7, - 18.8) µm, p < 0.0001; 18 months: - 38.9 (- 54.3, - 22.0) µm, p < 0.0001). Intraocular inflammation-related adverse events were reported in 4.6% of brolucizumab-treated eyes. CONCLUSIONS: This real-world study demonstrates that injection intervals may be significantly extended with maintained vision and reduced CMT in nAMD eyes switching to brolucizumab therapy from other anti-VEGFs.