QL1209 (pertuzumab biosimilar) versus reference pertuzumab plus trastuzumab and docetaxel in neoadjuvant treatment for HER2-positive, ER/PR-negative, early or locally advanced breast cancer: A multicenter, randomized, double-blinded, parallel-controlled, phase III equivalence trial.

BACKGROUND: This randomized, parallel-controlled, double-blinded, phase III equivalence study evaluated the equivalence of a proposed pertuzumab biosimilar QL1209 to the pertuzumab (Perjeta®) each with trastuzumab and docetaxel in neoadjuvant treatment of early or locally advanced breast cancer patients with HER2-positive, ER/PR-negative. METHODS: Eligible patients were randomly (1:1) assigned to receive 4 cycles of neoadjuvant QL1209 or pertuzumab each with trastuzumab and docetaxel, and adjuvant treatment. The primary endpoint was total pathologic complete response (tpCR), with equivalence margins of 0.76 to 1.32. RESULTS: Among the 585 patients enrolled, 257 and 259 patients were assigned to the QL1209 and pertuzumab groups, respectively. The tpCR rates were comparable in the QL1209 (109/255, 42.75%; 90% CI 37.65 to 47.84) and pertuzumab (117/259, 45.17%; 90% CI 40.09 to 50.26) groups. The tpCR risk ratio was 0.95 (90% CI, 0.80 to 1.11), and the 90% CI fell within the predefined equivalence margin. The most common grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse event was decreased neutrophil count (10. 9% vs. 12.7%) in the QL1209 and pertuzumab groups. CONCLUSIONS: QL1209 demonstrated equivalent efficacy and comparable safety profile to the reference pertuzumab in neoadjuvant treatment of HER2-positive, ER/PR-negative, early, or locally advanced breast cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinadrugtrials.org CTR20201073; ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04629846.

Topical Solution for Retinal Delivery: Bevacizumab and Ranibizumab Eye Drops in Anti-Aggregation Formula (AAF) in Rabbits.

PURPOSE: Wet age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is a blinding retinal disease. Monthly intravitreal anti-VEGF antibody injections of bevacizumab (off-label) and ranibizumab (FDA approved) are the standard of care. Antibody aggregation may interfere with ocular absorption/distribution. This study assessed topical delivery of dilute antibodies to the posterior segment of rabbit eyes using a novel anti-aggregation formula (AAF). METHODS: Bevacizumab, or biosimilar ranibizumab was diluted to 5 mg/ml in AAF. All rabbits were dosed twice daily. Substudy 1 rabbits (bevacizumab, 100 µl eye drops): Group 1 (bevacizumab/AAF, n = 6); Group 2 (bevacizumab/PBS, n = 7) and Vehicle control (AAF, n = 1). Substudy 2 rabbits (ranibizumab biosimilar/AAF, 50 µl eye drops): (ranibizumab biosimilar/AAF, n = 8). At 14.5 days, serum was drawn from rabbits. Aqueous, vitreous and retina samples were recovered from eyes and placed into AAF aliquots. Tissue analyzed using AAF as diluent. RESULTS: Bevacizumab in AAF permeated/accumulated in rabbit aqueous, vitreous and retina 10 times more, than when diluted in PBS. AAF/0.1% hyaluronic acid eye drops, dosed twice daily, provided mean tissue concentrations (ng/g) in retina (29.50), aqueous (12.34), vitreous (3.46), and serum (0.28 ng/ml). Additionally, the highest concentration (ng/g) of ranibizumab biosimilar was present in the retina (18.0), followed by aqueous (7.82) and vitreous (1.47). Serum concentration was negligible (< 0.04 ng/ml). No irritation was observed throughout the studies. CONCLUSIONS: Bevacizumab and ranibizumab, in an AAF diluent eye drop, can be delivered to the retina, by the twice daily dosing of a low concentration mAb formulation. This may prove to be an adjunct to intravitreal injections.

A randomized, double-blind, phase III study assessing clinical similarity of SB17 (proposed ustekinumab biosimilar) to reference ustekinumab in subjects with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis.

BACKGROUND: Ustekinumab (UST) is a safe and effective treatment for moderate-to-severe psoriasis. OBJECTIVES: To compare efficacy, safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity of the proposed UST biosimilar SB17 with reference UST in subjects with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. METHODS: In this randomized double-blind study, subjects were randomized to receive 45 mg of SB17 or UST subcutaneously at week 0, 4, and every 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was the percent change from baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index at week 12 with an equivalence margin of [-15%, 15%]. Other secondary efficacy, safety, PK, and immunogenicity endpoints were measured through week 28. RESULTS: Two hundred forty-nine subjects were randomized to SB17, 254 to UST. Adjusted difference of Psoriasis Area and Severity Index change from baseline at week 12 of -0.6% (95% confidence interval; -3.780, 2.579) was within the equivalence margin. Physician's Global Assessment and Dermatology Life Quality Index were also comparable. Overall treatment-emergent adverse events were comparable (SB17: 48.2%, UST: 48.8%). The overall incidence of antidrug antibodies up to Week 28 was 13.3% with SB17 and 39.4% with UST. LIMITATIONS: Data were only through week 28. CONCLUSION: SB17 was clinically biosimilar to UST up to week 28.

Pharmacokinetics and safety of candidate tocilizumab biosimilar CT-P47 administered by auto-injector or pre-filled syringe: a randomized, open­label, single-dose phase I study.

BACKGROUND: This study compared the pharmacokinetics (PK), immunogenicity, and safety of candidate tocilizumab biosimilar, CT-P47, administered via auto-injector (CT-P47 AI) or pre-filled syringe (CT-P47 PFS), in healthy Asian adults. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In this phase I, multicenter, open-label study, participants were randomized 1:1 to receive a single 162 mg/0.9 mL dose of CT-P47 via AI or PFS. Primary endpoints were area under the concentration - time curve from time zero to infinity (AUC0-inf) and maximum serum concentration (Cmax). PK equivalence was determined if 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for the ratios of geometric least-squares means (gLSMs) were within the predefined 80-125% equivalence margin. Secondary PK parameters, immunogenicity, and safety outcomes were also assessed. RESULTS: Of 314 participants randomized (155 CT-P47 AI; 159 CT-P47 PFS), 310 received the study drug (153 CT-P47 AI; 157 CT-P47 PFS). Primary and secondary PK results, immunogenicity and safety were similar between groups. Ninety percent CIs for the ratio of gLSMs were within the predefined equivalence margin for AUC0-inf (85.87-102.94) and Cmax (82.98-98.16). CONCLUSIONS: PK equivalence between CT-P47 AI and CT-P47 PFS was demonstrated in healthy Asian adults, with comparable immunogenicity and safety between the two devices. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05617183.

Tocilizumab is a biologic medicine used to treat inflammatory diseases, such as rheumatoid arthritis. A biosimilar is a drug that is an almost identical copy of an approved original ('reference') biologic medicine; it has identical efficacy and safety to the original medicine but is typically less expensive. CT­P47 is in development as a possible tocilizumab biosimilar.Some patients prefer injections using an auto-injector (AI) rather than a pre-filled syringe (PFS), for reasons including ease of use and convenience. With an AI, medicine is delivered automatically by firmly pressing the device against the skin, whereas, with a PFS, a needle is inserted into the skin and medicine delivered by depressing the plunger. The injection of CT­P47 using a PFS has shown comparable pharmacokinetics (i.e., the uptake, metabolism and excretion of the drug by the body) and safety to tocilizumab. Therefore, if the pharmacokinetics and safety of CT­P47 administered via AI and PFS were shown to be similar, this might expand the choice of administration devices available to patients.In this study, 310 healthy adults received a single injection of CT­P47 via AI or PFS. Blood samples were taken over 43 days to analyze pharmacokinetics. The uptake, metabolism and elimination of CT­P47 by the body was similar when administered by each device, suggesting that CT­P47 can be administered by either AI or PFS.

The retrospective evaluation of efficacy and safety data after switching from originator rituximab to biosimilar rituximab (CT-P10) in patients diagnosed with systemic lupus erythematosus: a single-center experience.

OBJECTIVE: In our study, we analyzed the efficacy and safety data of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) after switching to biosimilar rituximab (RTX). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-two patients who switched to RTX were included in the study. Efficacy data were analyzed using the Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2K) score, and safety data were analyzed using the frequency of side effects. RESULTS: The mean treatment duration of originator RTX was 35.6 ± 23.0 months, and the median treatment duration of biosimilar RTX was 17 months. The SLEDAI-2K score, approximately three months after the first dose of biosimilar RTX, was significantly lower (p = 0.027). A statistically significant difference was found between the SLEDAI-2K score assessed at the follow-up visit three months after the last dose of originator RTX and the SLEDAI-2K score obtained approximately three months after the first dose of biosimilar RTX (p = 0.011) and the calculated median SLEDAI-2K score was significantly lower than the SLEDAI-2K score assessed after administration of originator RTX. The side effect frequency that developed during the treatment of originator RTX was 15.3 per 100 patient-years. The most common side effect was infection, which was 15.3 per 100 patient-years. The most frequent infection was urinary tract infection. The side effect frequency during treatment of biosimilar RTX was 39 per 100 patient-years, and the most frequent infection was pneumonia. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, SLEDAI-2K scores demonstrated that no efficacy loss was experienced after switching to CT-P10 molecule, which is a biosimilar RTX. It was observed that switching to biosimilar RTX did not decrease treatment efficacy in the patient group diagnosed with SLE and biosimilar RTX was found to be safe.

Efficacy of switching from originator etanercept to biosimilar YLB113 in real-world patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A retrospective 12 months follow-up study.

Purpose: To investigate the disease activity in real-world patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who switched from originator etanercept (ETN) to biosimilar YLB113. Methods: Forty one RA patients who switched from ETN to YLB113 were divided into 2 groups based on the Disease Activity Score based on the 28-joint count (DAS28) 12 months after switching (R group: DAS28 < 2.6, N group: DAS28 ≥ 2.6), and the baseline characteristics were statistically examined. A receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis was performed to estimate the cut-off value of DAS28 at baseline to achieve remission 12 months after switching. Results: There was no significant difference in the DAS28 at baseline and 12 months after switching (p = .83). Sixteen out of the 20 patients in remission at baseline achieved remission after switching. A univariate analysis revealed the rheumatoid factor (p = .04) and DAS28 (p < .001) at baseline were significantly lower in the R group than in the N group. Furthermore, logistic regression analysis revealed DAS28 was an independent factor (p = .004) for achieving remission 12 months after switching. An ROC curve analysis showed the optimal cut-off value for DAS28 at baseline to achieve remission at 12 months after switching was 2.5. Conclusions: RA patients who achieved remission using originator ETN, were able to maintain remission even if they switched to YLB113.

A narrative review of the comparative safety of disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs used for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis.

INTRODUCTION: Disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) have improved the outcomes of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). DMARDs are classified into three categories: conventional synthetic DMARDs, biological DMARDs (including biosimilars), and targeted synthetic DMARDs. DMARDs, by way of their effect on the immune system, are associated with increased risk of adverse events, including infections, malignancies, cardiovascular disease, gastrointestinal perforations, and other less common events. AREAS COVERED: In this narrative literature review performed with searches of the PubMed database from 1 January 2010 through 1 January 2023, we compare the risk of safety events between DMARDs using data from both randomized clinical trials and observational studies. EXPERT OPINION: DMARD use in RA is associated with higher rates of serious infections, tuberculosis reactivation, opportunistic infections, and possibly malignancies. Specific biologic DMARDs and higher doses are associated with elevated risks of various adverse events (gastrointestinal perforations, thromboembolism, serious infection). Shared decision-making is paramount when choosing a treatment regimen for patients based on their own comorbidities. JAKi are the newest class of medications used for RA with robust safety data provided in clinical trials. However, more real-world evidence and phase-IV pharmacovigilance data are needed to better understand comparative safety profile of DMARDs in RA.

Systematic review: effectiveness and safety of switching between originator infliximab and biosimilar infliximab in patients with inflammatory bowel disease.

INTRODUCTION: Infliximab (IFX) biosimilars are available to treat inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), offering cost reductions versus originator IFX in some jurisdictions. However, concerns remain regarding the efficacy and safety of originator-to-biosimilar switching. This systematic literature review evaluated safety and effectiveness of switching between IFX products in patients with IBD, including multiple switchers. METHODS: Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched to capture studies (2012-2022) including patients with IBD who switched between approved IFX products. Effectiveness outcomes: disease activity; disease severity; response to treatment; patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Safety outcomes: incidence and rate of adverse events (AEs); discontinuations due to AEs, failure rate; hospitalizations; surgeries. Immunogenicity outcomes (n, %): anti-drug antibodies; patients receiving concomitant immunomodulatory medication. RESULTS: Data from 85 publications (81 observational, two randomized controlled trials) were included. Clinical effectiveness outcomes were consistent with the known profile of originator IFX with no difference after switching. There were no unexpected/serious AEs after switching, and rates of AEs were generally consistent with the known profile of IFX. CONCLUSIONS: Most studies reported that clinical, PROs, and safety outcomes for originator-to-biosimilar switching were clinically equivalent to originator responses. Limited data are available regarding multiple switches. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero identifier is CRD42021289144.

A randomized, double-blind, single-dose, phase 1 study comparing the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, safety, and immunogenicity of denosumab biosimilar CT­P41 and reference denosumab in healthy males.

BACKGROUND: This study's objective was to demonstrate pharmacokinetic (PK) similarity and safety of denosumab biosimilar, CT­P41, and United States-licensed reference denosumab (US-denosumab) in healthy male Asian adults, considering also pharmacodynamic (PD) outcomes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This double-blind, two-arm, parallel-group, Phase 1 study randomized (1:1) healthy males to a single (60-mg) subcutaneous dose of CT­P41 or US-denosumab. Primary endpoints were area under the concentration - time curve (AUC) from time zero to infinity (AUC0-inf), AUC from time zero to the last quantifiable concentration (AUC0-last), and maximum serum concentration (Cmax). PK equivalence was determined if 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for ratios of geometric least-squares means (gLSMs) were within the predefined 80-125% equivalence margin. Secondary PK, PD, safety, and immunogenicity outcomes were also evaluated. RESULTS: Of 154 participants randomized (76 CT­P41; 78 US-denosumab), 151 received study drug (74 CT­P41; 77 US-denosumab). Primary and secondary PK results, PD results, safety, and immunogenicity were comparable between groups. Ninety percent CIs for ratios of gLSMs were within the predefined equivalence margin for AUC0-inf (100.4-114.7), AUC0-last (99.9-114.3), and Cmax (95.2-107.3). CONCLUSIONS: Following a single dose in healthy males, CT­P41 demonstrated PK equivalence with US-denosumab. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT06037395.

Nanosimilars: A Scientific or A Regulatory Debate?

The paper highlights the necessity for a robust regulatory framework for assessing nanomedicines and their off-patent counterparts, termed as nanosimilar, which could be considered as 'similar' to the prototype nanomedicine,based on essential criteria describing the 'similarity'. The term 'similarity' should be focused on criteria that describe nanocarriers, encompassing their physicochemical, thermodynamic, morphological, and biological properties, including surface interactions and pharmacokinetics. Nanocarriers can be regarded as advanced self-assembled excipients (ASAEs) due to their complexity and chaotic behavior and should be evaluated by using essential criteria in order for off-patent nanomedicines be termed as nanosimilars, from a regulatory perspective. Collaboration between the pharmaceutical industry, regulatory bodies, and artificial intelligence (AI) startups is pivotal for the precise characterization and approval processes for nanomedicines and nanosimilars and embracing innovative tools and terminology facilitates the development of a sustainable regulatory framework, ensuring safety and efficacy. This crucial shift toward precision R&D practices addresses the complexity inherent in nanocarriers, paving the way for therapeutic advancements with economic benefits.

Relative bioavailability, immunogenicity, and safety of two adalimumab-adbm formulations in healthy volunteers: a double-blind, randomized, single-dose, parallel-arm Phase I trial (VOLTAIRE-HCLF).

OBJECTIVE: VOLTAIRE-HCLF compared the relative bioavailability of citrate-free high-concentration and reference formulations of the biosimilar adalimumab-adbm (Cyltezo®), including pharmacokinetic (PK) profiles, immunogenicity, and safety profiles in healthy volunteers. METHODS: Healthy volunteers (N = 200) aged 18-55 years and with body mass index of 18.5-29.9 kg/m2 and no prior exposure to adalimumab were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive a single subcutaneous injection of either adalimumab-adbm 40 mg/0.4 mL (high-concentration formulation) or 40 mg/0.8 mL (reference formulation). Participants completed 13 follow-up visits over 57 days, followed by a safety follow-up period of up to 70 days. RESULTS: The main PK parameters were similar for the high-concentration and reference groups. For all primary endpoints, the geometric mean ratios and 90% confidence intervals of AUC0-1344, AUC0-∞, and Cmax for both groups were entirely within the standard 80-125% bioequivalence acceptance range at 101.88% (93.31-111.23%), 105.38% (95.06-116.81%), and 91.29% (84.38-98.76%), respectively. There were no differences in the proportion of anti-drug antibody-positive participants or in the distribution of anti-drug antibody titers between the two formulations at any time point after drug dosing. Participants who were given the high-concentration formulation of adalimumab-adbm experienced a lower incidence of adverse events and local reactions than those who were given the reference formulation. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the high-concentration and reference adalimumab-adbm formulations had highly similar PK and immunogenicity profiles and were safe and well tolerated. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05203289.

Immunomodulation profile of the biosimilar trastuzumab MYL-1401O in a bioequivalence phase I study.

The initial Phase-I single centre, single dose, randomized, double-blind, cross-over study was planned to assess the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic bioequivalence of the trastuzumab biosimilar (MYL-1401O) compared to the reference Herceptin®. Their respective immunomodulation profile presented in this paper involved healthy males receiving a single infusion of both monoclonals, separated by a washout period. Sixty parameters were assessed in total, including serum cytokines, peripheral mononuclear cell (PBMC) subsets, cell activation and response to recall antigens and mitogen, pre- and post- infusion, as well as a cytokine release assay (CRA) at baseline. Trastuzumab infusion induced a transient and weak peak of serum IL-6 at 6 h, and a modulation of mononuclear cell subset profile and activation level, notably CD16 + cells. Except for CD8 + T cells, there were no significant differences between Herceptin® and MYL-1401O. In CRA, PBMC stimulated with MYL-1401O or Herceptin® similarly secreted IL-6, TNF-α, IL-1ß, GM-CSF, IFN-γ, and IL-10, but no or low level of IL-2. Interestingly, some observed adverse events correlated with IL-2 and IFN-γ in CRA. MYL-1401O exhibited a very similar immunomodulation profile to Herceptin®, strongly supporting its bioequivalence. This approach may thus be included in a proof-of-concept study. CRA may be used as a predictive assay for the evaluation of clinical monoclonals.

Clinical outcomes of switching to adalimumab biosimilar (MSB11022) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: RESTART Spanish Registry.

OBJECTIVE: MSB11022 is a biosimilar of adalimumab that has been shown comparable bioequivalence, safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity profiles to the reference adalimumab in healthy volunteers or in patients with psoriasis or rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This is the first study conducted under clinical practice conditions evaluating the switch from reference adalimumab to MSB11022 in patients with RA. METHODS: Retrospective and multicenter study with data from the medical records of patients with RA who switched from reference adalimumab or another biosimilar to MSB11022 and maintained this treatment for at least 6 months. Information registered comes from baseline visit, the moment of the switch, and the follow-up visits. RESULTS: Data from 86 patients were evaluated (median age 63.5 years, 75.6% female, 44.2% had erosive RA). Only 3.5% of the patients received biologic therapy prior to adalimumab. At baseline, median DAS28-CRP was 1.77 (80.2% in remission and 96.5% with low disease activity) and median CDAI was 4.00 (44.2% in remission and 90.7% with low disease activity). After a median follow-up of 8 months, median DAS28-CRP was 1.87 (86.0% in remission and 94.2% with low disease activity) and median CDAI was 4.00 (38.5% in remission and 95.3% with low disease activity). Only three patients experienced pain, swelling, and stinging at the injection site or a locally extensive hematoma in the area of administration. CONCLUSIONS: Adalimumab biosimilar MSB11022 maintained the efficacy benefits provided by previous adalimumab treatments with a safety profile in line with that already described for other biosimilars.

Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Aflibercept Biosimilar (P041) Compared with Originator Product in Patients with Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the noninferiority of biosimilar aflibercept (P041, CinnaGen) to the originator aflibercept (AFL, Regeneron) in terms of efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity. DESIGN: This was a phase Ш, 52-week, multicenter, randomized, double-masked, and active control trial involving eyes in a 1:1 ratio. SUBJECTS: Patients with active subfoveal choroidal neovascularization secondary to age-related macular degeneration randomized into the 2 groups of P041 and AFL. METHODS: Patients received an injection of aflibercept every 4 weeks for 3 doses, followed by administration every 8 weeks up to week 48. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the noninferiority analysis of eyes maintaining vision at week 52. Secondary outcomes included the changes in visual acuity and retinal thickness, safety evaluation, and immunogenicity during the study. RESULTS: In total, 168 eyes of 168 patients were included. At week 52, the proportion of patients maintaining vision was 94.44% in the P041 group compared with 94.52% in the AFL group. The 95% confidence interval (CI) for the difference of maintaining vision from baseline did not exceed the predefined noninferiority margin of 10% (difference, -0.0008; 95% CI, -0.074 to 0.074; P = 0.98). Secondary outcomes indicated similar results in both arms (all P > 0.05). Safety measured outcomes and immunogenicity were similar between the 2 study groups. CONCLUSIONS: Biosimilar aflibercept was noninferior to AFL in eyes with neovascular age-related macular degeneration. Other efficacy and safety findings also indicated the similarity of 2 products. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURES: Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

Clinical Pharmacology of GP40321 (Insulin Glulisine Biosimilar): Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Comparability in a Hyperinsulinemic-Euglycemic Clamp Procedure.

The aim of the study was to compare the pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of T-glu (GP40321, test drug), and reference insulin glulisine in a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp procedure. During this study, 34 healthy male volunteers underwent the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp procedure following subcutaneous 0.3 U/kg injection of T-glu or reference insulin glulisine in a randomized, double-blind, crossover study. Plasma glucose levels were monitored every 5 minutes for 8 hours. Glucose infusion rate adjustment was based on the blood glucose measurements. Evaluation of PD was performed using the glucose infusion rate values, while PK was calculated using insulin concentrations measured via enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. The study results showed that the 90% CI for the geometric mean ratios of primary PK and PD of T-glu and reference insulin glulisine were within 80%-125% comparability limits, and that the safety profiles were comparable. PK, PD, and safety similarity of T-glu and reference insulin glulisine was demonstrated.

Comparative study of efficacy and safety: Biosimilar rituximab versus originator rituximab in the treatment of pemphigus.

Rituximab is a monoclonal antibody that targets CD20 antigen in B cells. For pemphigus, rituximab has been highly effective in steroid-sparing therapy for moderate to severe cases. Originator rituximab has demonstrated favorable treatment effects in patients with pemphigus, but its high cost remains a challenge. Biosimilar rituximab is expected to offer a potential solution. However, it is required for the comparative study of efficacy and safety between biosimilar and originator because all biosimilars may not be identical to the originator. In this study, we compared the treatment effects and safety of biosimilar (Truxima) and originator (MabThera) rituximab in patients with pemphigus. A final cohort of 52 patients in the MabThera group and 72 patients in the Truxima group was enrolled. Except for the intravenous immunoglobulin administration rate, there were no differences in baseline characteristics between the two groups, and for the purpose of comparing efficacy, investigations into time to complete remission, total steroid intake to complete remission, and total steroid intake for 6 months following rituximab treatment revealed no significant differences between the two groups. Truxima can be considered a relatively affordable alternative treatment option for pemphigus, offering cost-effectiveness to patients who are indicated for the treatment with MabThera.

A pharmacokinetic study comparing the biosimilar HEC14028 and Dulaglutide (Trulicity®) in healthy Chinese subjects.

This study aimed to evaluate the pharmacokinetics (PKs), safety, and immunogenicity of the biosimilar HEC14028 compared to reference Trulicity® (dulaglutide) in healthy male Chinese subjects. This study was a single-center, randomized, open, single-dose, parallel-controlled comparative Phase I clinical trial, including a screening period of up to 14 days, a 17-day observation period after administration, and a 7-day safety follow-up period. A total of 68 healthy male subjects were randomly assigned (1:1) to the test group (HEC14028) and the reference group (dulaglutide) (single 0.75 mg abdominal subcutaneous dose). The primary objective was to evaluate the pharmacokinetic characteristics of HEC14028 and compare the pharmacokinetic similarities between HEC14028 and dulaglutide. The primary PK endpoints were maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) and area under the blood concentration-time curve from zero time to the estimated infinite time (AUC0-∞). The study results showed that HEC14028 and dulaglutide were pharmacokinetically equivalent: 90% confidence interval (CI) of Cmax and AUC0-∞ geometric mean ratios were 102.9%-122.0% and 97.1%-116.9%, respectively, which were both within the range of 80.00%-125.00%. No grade 3 or above treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs), serious adverse events (SAEs), TEAEs leading to withdrawal from the trial, or TEAEs leading to death were reported in this study. Both HEC14028 and dulaglutide showed good and similar safety profiles, and no incremental immunogenicity was observed in subjects receiving HEC14028 and dulaglutide.

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of SCD411 and reference aflibercept in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration.

To compare the efficacy and safety of the proposed aflibercept biosimilar SCD411 and reference aflibercept in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration, this randomized, double-masked, parallel-group, multicenter study was conducted in 14 countries from 13 August 2020 to 8 September 2022. Patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration. With subfoveal, juxtafoveal, or extrafoveal choroidal neovascularization were aged 50 years or older. Intravitreal injection of SCD411 or aflibercept (2.0 mg) were administered every 4 weeks for the first three injections and every 8 weeks until week 48. The primary efficacy endpoint was the change in best-corrected visual acuity from baseline to week 8 with an adjusted equivalence margin of ± 3.0 letters. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either SCD411 (n = 288) or reference aflibercept (n = 288). A total of 566 participants (98.3%) completed week 8 of the study. The least-squares mean difference of change in best-corrected visual acuity from baseline to week 8 (SCD411-aflibercept) was - 0.4 letters (90% confidence interval = - 1.6 to 0.9). The incidence of ocular (69 of 287 [24.0%] vs. 71 of 286 [24.8%]) and serious ocular (5 of 287 [1.7%] vs. 3 of 286 [1.0%]) treatment-emergent adverse effects were similar between the SCD411 and aflibercept groups. Immunogenicity analysis revealed a low incidence of neutralizing antibody formation in both groups. In conclusion, SCD411 has equivalent efficacy compared with reference aflibercept in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration and has a comparable safety profile. The results support the potential use of SCD411 for the treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration.

Trastuzumab Biosimilar (HLX02), Pertuzumab Plus Chemotherapy in Patients with HER2-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer after Progression of Trastuzumab: A Prospective, Phase II Study.

PURPOSE: This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of trastuzumab biosimilar (HLX02) in combination with pertuzumab and chemotherapy in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) after progression of trastuzumab. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this prospective, single-arm, phase II study, patients with HER2-positive MBC after progression of trastuzumab received pertuzuamb, HLX02, and chemotherapy in Beijing Cancer Hospital from March 2020 to December 2022. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), and secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), overall survival (OS), and safety. The study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05188495). RESULTS: A total of 45 patients were included in this study. Twelve patients (26.7%) were treated in second-line and 33 patients (73.3%) were in third-line and later setting. Eighty percent and 15.5% patients had previously received pyrotinib/lapatinib and T-DM1, respectively. With a median follow-up of 24.4 months (range, 1.2 to 43.9 months), the median PFS was 7.6 months (95% confidence interval, 4.3 to 10.9), OS was not reached, the ORR was 31.1%, and DCR was 91.1%. The treatment was well tolerated. CONCLUSION: The combination of trastuzumab biosimilar HLX02, pertuzumab, and chemotherapy exhibited promising efficacy and a favorable safety profile as second- and beyond-line treatment in HER2-positive MBC.

Efficacy and Safety of BP02 (Trastuzumab Biosimilar) in HER2-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Multicenter Phase III Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Trastuzumab targets human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) receptors and is indicated for treating HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer. BP02, a recombinant IgG1 kappa humanized monoclonal antibody, is being developed as a trastuzumab biosimilar. The objective of this study was to evaluate the equivalence of BP02 with reference trastuzumab (RT: Herceptin®-EU) in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer. METHODS: This double-blinded, 1:1 randomized, parallel-group, active-controlled, phase III equivalence trial recruited women aged 18-75 years with histologically/cytologically confirmed HER2- positive, locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer with systemic metastasis, from 59 sites in India. Patients were randomly allocated 1:1 stratified by estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor status to receive BP02/RT (8-mg/kg loading dose on day 1-cycle 1, 6 mg/kg on day 1-cycles 2-8, of each 3-week cycle) combined with docetaxel (75 mg/m2 on day 1-cycles 1-8) [induction phase]. Participants with complete or partial response, or stable disease at the end of the induction phase continued the study drug until disease progression/treatment discontinuation [maintenance phase]. The primary efficacy endpoint was the objective response rate per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1. RESULTS: Between 23 September, 2020 and 16 September, 2022, 690 patients were recruited (n = 345 each to BP02/RT). At the end of the induction phase (intent-to-treat population), a similar proportion of patients achieved an objective response rate with BP02 (n = 231 [67.0%], 95% confidence interval [CI] 62.0, 71.9) and RT (n = 238 [69.0%], 95% CI 64.1, 73.9). The 95% CI of risk difference (-2.03, 95% CI -9.15, 5.09) and 90% CI of risk ratio (0.97, 90% CI 0.89, 1.06) were within equivalence margins of ± 13% and (0.80, 1.25), respectively. Treatment-emergent adverse events leading to treatment withdrawal were reported in 2.9% and 3.2% patients with BP02 and RT, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: BP02 showed an equivalent efficacy and similar safety profile to RT at the end of 24 weeks. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: CTRI Number: CTRI/2020/04/024456.