Serum concentrations after switching from originator infliximab to the biosimilar CT-P13 in patients with quiescent inflammatory bowel disease (SECURE): an open-label, multicentre, phase 4 non-inferiority trial

Clinical experience of using biosimilars in Crohn's disease and their effectiveness

INTRODUCTION

The approval of biosimilars in the management of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) has offered an answer to a growing concern about healthcare costs, and availability of treatments. Several studies have been conducted to demonstrate proof of biosimilars effectiveness as treatment in Crohn's disease (CD).

AREAS COVERED

Since 2013, the European Medicines Agency has approved five biosimilars for infliximab and eight for adalimumab. Initial data leading to approval were extrapolated from studies conducted in patients with rheumatological or dermatological diseases, but recent studies filled the gap of clinical data among patients with IBD. In this review, 75 studies were included, with data from a total of 20 707 patients with CD. Clinical data on biosimilars in the treatment of CD show equivalence in terms of efficacy, either as induction or maintenance of treatment and regardless of previous exposure to originator or other biosimilar.

EXPERT OPINION

Since biosimilar market entry, utilization of infliximab increased by 89.9% and by 22.4% for adalimumab in European countries. With a 10-year insight since the first approval of biosimilar in Europe, biosimilars prescriptions should be implemented in routine clinical practice given the efficacy and safety profile.

Navigating the pharmacotherapeutic management of comorbid inflammatory bowel disease and primary sclerosing cholangitis

INTRODUCTION

Primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) is the most specific hepatobiliary extraintestinal manifestation in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). PSC ultimately has a poor prognosis, with disease progression resulting in liver cirrhosis and subsequent liver failure. While there is current data for the medical management of IBD, the optimal approach for concurrent PSC-IBD is unclear.

AREAS COVERED

This review focuses on the current literature of pharmacotherapy in the PSC-IBD population including anti-tumor necrosis factor agents, vedolizumab, JAK inhibitors, IL-12/23 inhibitors, and thiopurines. Regarding PSC-IBD, it focuses on effectiveness of IBD therapies on liver biochemistry and IBD activity as well as the advent of clinically relevant liver outcomes and safety. The authors also address the need for further advances in research.

EXPERT OPINION

The longer-term data for pharmacological management for IBD is well established. In the concomitant PSC-IBD population there is no drug to date that has effectively reduced disease related morbidity and mortality outcomes. There are limitations in the current, mostly retrospective data on IBD drugs in PSC-IBD with respect to samples sizes, heterogenous outcomes, and lack of a high-quality surrogate endpoint in PSC. However, current data for adalimumab offers encouraging results which require further exploration with larger prospective studies.

Evaluating the Efficacy of Infliximab in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Review of the Literature

The introduction of steroid therapy in 1955 markedly decreased the mortality rate of severe ulcerative colitis (UC) from 24% in the placebo group to 7%, and it is currently less than 1% in specialist centers. Despite this advancement, the response of severe UC to steroids has stagnated over the past 50 years, with a high rate of colectomy persisting for severe to moderately severe cases. Infliximab (IFX) (Remicade, Centocor Inc., Malvern, PA, United States), an intravenously administered chimeric monoclonal immunoglobulin G1 antibody targeting tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α), has shown efficacy in numerous randomized controlled trials for treating moderate to severe and fistulizing Crohn's disease, particularly in patients unresponsive to conventional therapies. This led to its approval by the US Food and Drug Administration in 1998 for treating active and fistulizing Crohn's disease. Most clinical research on IFX has focused on Crohn's disease, which is characterized as a Th1-type condition driven by pro-inflammatory cytokines like TNF-α. Conversely, UC has traditionally been viewed as a Th2-type condition where TNF-α plays a lesser role. However, recent studies indicate that TNF-α might also contribute to the pathogenesis of UC. These findings highlight the necessity for larger randomized controlled trials to further investigate the benefits of therapies like IFX, with the ultimate goal of improving treatment outcomes and quality of life for patients with inflammatory bowel disease.

Anti-TNFα in inflammatory bowel disease: from originators to biosimilars

The introduction of anti-tumor necrosis factor α (TNFα) biologics significantly innovated inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) treatment and increased medical costs. The recent expiration of patents of some anti-TNFα biologics (such as infliximab and adalimumab) facilitated the development of biosimilars. Comparable pharmacokinetic, efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity profiles between anti-TNFα originators and biosimilars were demonstrated in different studies. Anti-TNFα biosimilars hold promise for reducing the high cost of biologics and increasing patient access to biologics. In this review, we outline the current data on the use of anti-TNFα originators and biosimilars in patients with IBD, with a focus on the efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity profiles of infliximab and adalimumab biosimilars. The potential benefits, challenges, and future directions of anti-TNFα biosimilars are also discussed in the review.

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.

Switching from intravenous to subcutaneous infliximab and vedolizumab in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: impact on trough levels, day hospital visits, and medical expenses

OBJECTIVE

Subcutaneous (SC) infliximab (IFX) and vedolizumab (VDZ) have recently become available. We aimed to examine the impact of switching from intravenous (IV) to SC IFX and VDZ in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) on costs, the day hospital burden, trough levels, and clinical outcomes.

METHODS

Our study comprised the cohort of IBD patients receiving IV IFX or VDZ at our hospital in 2022. We evaluated costs, day hospital visits, trough levels, biochemical markers, relapse rates, and self-report outcomes until Jun 30th 2023.

RESULTS

Of 114 patients, 18 continued IV therapy, 80 were switched to SC therapy, and 16 were inductions. Eighty-eight (90%) remained in steroid-free remission with no difference between the IV or SC groups. The mean IFX trough level changed from 8.2 ± 4.5 µg/ml to 14.5 ± 5.9 µg/ml, p < 0.001, and the VDZ trough level from 14.7 ± 7.1 mg/ml to 26.5 ± 13.8 mg/ml, p < 0.001. The average yearly costs of infusions and injections per patient were 2 580 € and 7 482 € for IFX and 15 990 € and 13 101 € for VDZ. The annual reduction of day hospital visits was 6,9 per patient.

CONCLUSIONS

IV and SC IFX and VDZ are equally effective in maintaining remission in IBD, but SC administration reduces day hospital visits and results in higher trough levels. SC VDZ is less and SC IFX more expensive than IV therapy. Further studies are needed to assess optimal dosing and separate trough levels for SC therapy.

Switching from Intravenous to Subcutaneous Biological Therapy for Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients Remains a Challenge

Biological inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) medications, once limited to intravenous (IV) administration, can now be administered both via IV and subcutaneously (SC). This study investigates patient preferences, willingness to switch from IV to SC, and associated factors. A questionnaire covering demographics, disease-related inquiries, quality of life, and IBD medication preferences was distributed via email, the Israeli Crohn's Disease and Ulcerative Colitis Foundation, infusion centers, and clinics. From 454 IBD patients (median age: 42 years; 55.7% female), responses revealed a preference for SC every 8 weeks, which is comparable to daily oral dosing. Both options were significantly favored over IV every 8 weeks and SC every 2 weeks, with no statistically significant differences between the latter two. However, among patients who were experienced with both SC and IV administration, a clear preference for SC administration every 2 weeks over IV every 8 weeks surfaced. Among IV-treated patients, 54.5% resisted switching to SC. Key reasons for this included medical staff presence (57.7%), a fear of needles (46.4%), belief in infusion efficacy (37.1%), and longer intervals between infusions (36.1%). Findings suggest that transitioning from IV to SC treatment is challenging due to patient resistance, which is influenced by specific factors. Identifying and addressing these obstacles is crucial for optimizing IBD management.

Comparison of endoscopic healing and durability between infliximab originator and CT-P13 in pediatric patients with inflammatory bowel disease

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Favourable clinical data were published on the efficacy of CT-P13, the first biosimilar of infliximab (IFX), in pediatric inflammatory bowel disease (IBD); however, few studies have compared the effect on endoscopic healing (EH) and drug retention rate between the IFX originator and CT-P13. Therefore, we aimed to compare EH and the drug retention rate between the IFX originator and CT-P13.

METHODS

Children with Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC)/IBD-unclassified (IBD-U) at 22 medical centers were enrolled, with a retrospective review conducted at 1-year and last follow-up. Clinical remission, EH and drug retention rate were evaluated.

RESULTS

We studied 416 pediatric patients with IBD: 77.4% had CD and 22.6% had UC/IBD-U. Among them, 255 (61.3%) received the IFX originator and 161 (38.7%) received CT-P13. No statistically significant differences were found between the IFX originator and CT-P13 in terms of corticosteroid-free remission and adverse events. At 1-year follow-up, EH rates were comparable between them (CD: P=0.902, UC: P=0.860). The estimated cumulative cessation rates were not significantly different between the two groups. In patients with CD, the drug retention rates were 66.1% in the IFX originator and 71.6% in the CT-P13 group at the maximum follow-up period (P >0.05). In patients with UC, the drug retention rates were 49.8% in the IFX originator and 56.3% in the CT-P13 group at the maximum follow-up period (P >0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The IFX originator and CT-P13 demonstrated comparable therapeutic response including EH, clinical remission, drug retention rate and safety in pediatric IBD.

Comparison of the Pharmacokinetics of CT-P13 Between Crohn's Disease and Ulcerative Colitis

BACKGROUND

We aimed to compare trough infliximab levels and the development of antidrug antibody (ADA) for 1 year between Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) patients who were biologic-naive, and to evaluate their impact on clinical outcomes.

METHODS

This was a prospective, multicenter, observational study. Biologic-naive patients with moderate to severe CD or UC who started CT-P13, an infliximab biosimilar, therapy were enrolled. Trough drug and ADA levels were measured periodically for 1 year after CT-P13 initiation.

RESULTS

A total of 267 patients who received CT-P13 treatment were included (CD 168, UC 99). The rates of clinical remission (72% vs. 32.3%, P <0.001) at week 54 were significantly higher in CD than in UC. The median trough drug level (μg/mL) was significantly higher in CD than in UC up to week 14 (week 2, 18.7 vs. 14.7, P <0.001; week 6, 12.5 vs. 8.6, P <0.001; week 14, 3.4 vs. 2.5, P =0.001). The median ADA level (AU/mL) was significantly lower in CD than in UC at week 2 (6.3 vs. 6.5, P =0.046), week 30 (7.9 vs. 11.8, P =0.007), and week 54 (9.3 vs. 12.3, P =0.032). Development of ADA at week 2 [adjusted odds ratio (aOR)=0.15, P =0.026], initial C-reactive protein level (aOR=0.87, P =0.032), and CD over UC (aOR=1.92, P <0.001) were independent predictors of clinical remission at week 54.

CONCLUSION

Infliximab shows more favorable pharmacokinetics, including high drug trough and low ADA levels, in CD than in UC, which might result in better clinical outcomes for 1-year infliximab treatment in CD patients.

Monitoring a Mandatory Nonmedical Switching Policy from Originator to Biosimilar Infliximab in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: A Population-Based Cohort Study

Background

On September 5, 2019, British Columbia announced a new policy (the Biosimilars Initiative) to switch from originator to biosimilar infliximab for patients with inflammatory bowel diseases.

Objective

To monitor the impacts of the policy on the use of medications and health services during the first year of the policy.

Methods

In this population-based cohort study, we used administrative health data to construct three historical cohorts and one policy cohort of patients with inflammatory bowel diseases who used the originator infliximab. We then monitored the cumulative incidence of medications and health services. Log-likelihood ratios were used to quantify differences between the policy cohort and the average of the historical cohorts.

Results

The cohorts included 1839-2368 users of the originator infliximab, ages 4-90 years, mean age 43 years. During the first year of follow-up, we found: (1) a 0.9% increase in the first dispensation of infliximab, biosimilar, or originator; (2) a 16.2% increase in infliximab dose escalation; (3) a decrease of 2.4% in the dispensation of antibiotics and a 2.6% decrease in new use of prednison; (4) an anticipated increase in visits to physicians and gastroenterologists to manage switching to biosimilars (24.0%); (5) a 4.0% decrease in discharges from hospital; and (6) a 2.9% decrease in emergency admissions to hospital.

Conclusion

British Columbia's Biosimilars Initiative for nonmedical switching from originator to biosimilar infliximab for inflammatory bowel diseases was not associated with harmful impacts on medications and health services use. An increase in dose escalation was accompanied by an improvement in health status proxies.

The Sincerest Form of Flattery? Biosimilars in Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Biosimilar medications have the potential to significantly reduce the cost of treatment in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Observational studies have shown similar efficacy and safety of biosimilars to biologic reference products. Shared decision-making is crucial to the successful implementation of these agents.

Efficacy and safety of biosimilar versus originator infliximab in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: A real-world cohort analysis

BACKGROUND

Anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) monoclonal antibody, infliximab, is the primary therapeutic modality for patients with Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC), refractory to conventional therapy. Biosimilars of infliximab have been shown to have equivalent efficacy to originator infliximab. We compared the safety and efficacy of infliximab biosimilar with the originator in Indian patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

METHODS

Patients with IBD treated with either originator or biosimilar infliximab from January 2005 to October 2020 were included in this retrospective analysis. The safety and efficacy of originator or biosimilar infliximab in inducing and maintaining clinical remission at weeks 14 and 52 for CD and UC were evaluated. Disease activity was estimated at baseline, after induction therapy, after 1 year of treatment, and during 12 months of follow-up.

RESULTS

In all, 137 patients (82 CD; 55 UC) were included, of whom 102 were on originator, and 35 patients received biosimilar. In biosimilar group, clinical response and remission rates at weeks 14 and 52 were 84.2%, 58% and 68.4%, 52.6% in CD and 81.2%, 56.2% and 68.7%, 62.5% in UC patients, respectively. Among patients who were on originator, clinical response and remission rates at weeks 14 and 52 were 79.4%, 46% and 57.1%, 43% in CD and 72%, 64.1% and 66.7%, 56.4% in UC patients, respectively. Thirty-three (24.1%) patients experienced adverse events; eighteen developed tuberculosis (TB), of whom 17 received originator and one patient received biosimilar.

CONCLUSIONS

Infliximab biosimilar is comparable to originator infliximab in terms of safety profile and its efficacy in inducing and maintaining remission in patients with IBD.

Impact of Infliximab-dyyb (Infliximab Biosimilar) on Clinical and Patient-Reported Outcomes: 1-Year Follow-up Results from an Observational Real-World Study Among Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease in the US and Canada (the ONWARD Study)

Introduction

To date, there are limited real-world studies published on the use of infliximab-dyyb, a biosimilar to reference product (RP) infliximab approved for the treatment of moderate to severe inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), including Crohn’s disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) in North America. This study examined utilization patterns and the effects of infliximab-dyyb on clinical outcomes, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and healthcare resource use (HCRU) in IBD patients in a real-world setting.

Methods

In this prospective, observational study, adult IBD patients in the US and Canada were recruited to initiate treatment with infliximab-dyyb and followed for 12 months. Patients included biologic-naïve users of infliximab-dyyb and patients switching from RP infliximab or other biologics to infliximab-dyyb. Partial Mayo (pMAYO) and Harvey Bradshaw Index (HBI) scores measured clinical outcomes for the UC and CD cohorts, respectively. Key PRO measures included the SIBDQ, EQ-VAS, and psychological outcomes. In addition, work productivity, HCRU, and adverse events (AEs) were assessed.

Results

A total of 67 CD and 48 UC patients were enrolled (51% female; mean age 44 years; 87% Caucasian; mean BMI 27.9). Thirty-nine patients were biologic-naïve, 57 switched from RP infliximab, and 19 switched from other biologics. Among UC biologic-naïve users, pMAYO decreased from 5.67 to 1.09 (p < 0.0001) and the remission rate increased from 5.6 to 90.9% (p = 0.0015). For UC patients switching from RP infliximab, pMAYO decreased from 1.38 to 0.29 (p = 0.0103). For CD biologic-naïve users, HBI scores and remission rates did not significantly change. The scores on all the PROs significantly improved from baseline to 12 months. A total of 22 AEs occurred consistent with the known AE profile for infliximab.

Conclusions

Clinical outcomes among biologic-naïve users of infliximab-dyyb improved for UC and were maintained for CD patients. Biologic-naïve users of infliximab-dyyb showed significant improvements in PROs. Patients switching from RP infliximab to infliximab-dyyb maintained their clinical outcomes and PROs.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Registration Number: NCT03801928 (February 23, 2018).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12325-022-02104-6.

Multiple Switches From the Originator Infliximab to Biosimilars Is Effective and Safe in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Prospective Multicenter Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Though a single nonmedical switch from the originator infliximab (IFX) to a biosimilar is considered effective and safe for most patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), very limited data are available on multiple successive switches.

METHODS

We performed a prospective multicenter cohort study of adult IBD patients who underwent 2 switches from the originator IFX to CT-P13 to SB2 (group 1), 1 switch from CT-P13 to SB2 (group 2), and 1 switch from the originator IFX to CT-P13 (group 3). Patients were assessed at 4 and 12 months since the most recent switch for remission using clinical (physician's assessment) and biochemical (C-reactive protein [CRP], and fecal calprotectin [FC]) measures. Patients discontinuing treatment for ineffectiveness or adverse events before month 12 were imputed as nonremitters.

RESULTS

One hundred seventy-six patients (Crohn's disease 71%, ulcerative colitis 27.8%, IBD unclassified 1.2%; group 1, 69; group 2, 80; group 3, 27) were included. At 12 months after the most recent switch 76.9% (40 of 52, group 1), 65.7% (46 of 70, group 2) and 76.9% (20 of 26, group 3) of patients were in clinical remission. Treatment persistence at 12 months was 85.0%, 87.0%, and 70.1%, respectively. There were no significant differences in the rate of clinical, CRP, FC remission, or treatment persistence at 12 months between the 3 groups. Infusion reactions occurred in 1.7% of patients (3/176), all in patients with antidrug antibodies from group 2.

CONCLUSIONS

Multiple successive switching and switching between biosimilars of IFX seemed to be effective and safe.

Therapeutic applications of biosimilar monoclonal antibodies: Systematic review of the efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity in autoimmune disorders

PURPOSE

Biosimilars are biological products that could be used instead of reference biological drugs to provide a less costly option for treating patients with autoimmune disorders. With the introduction of biosimilar monoclonal antibodies into the drug market, the main concern is confirming the similarity in terms of efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of these biosimilars with their reference products. The presence of valuable comparative clinical trials to demonstrate these similarities with analytical methods is challenging. This review discusses the similarity between biosimilar mAbs and reference products as candidates for autoimmune diseases.

METHODS

Data on efficacy endpoints, adverse events, production of anti-drug antibodies (ADAs), and neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) were collected from trials.

FINDINGS

Overall, these data suggest the similarity between biosimilar mAbs and reference products in terms of safety and efficacy.

IMPLICATIONS

Biosimilars are used in a wider range of diseases, and by examining their similarities in all those diseases with reference drugs, more comprehensive results can be obtained.

Outcome of Reverse Switching From CT-P13 to Originator Infliximab in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease

BACKGROUND

Patients suffering from inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) and treated with originator infliximab are increasingly being switched to biosimilars. Some patients, however, are "reverse switched" to treatment with the originator. Here we assess the prevalence of reverse switching, including its indication and outcomes.

METHODS

In this retrospective multicenter cohort study, data on patients with IBD from 9 hospitals in the Netherlands were collected. All adult patients with IBD were included if they previously had been switched from originator infliximab to the biosimilar CT-P13 and had a follow-up time of at least 52 weeks after the initial switch. The reasons for reverse switching were categorized into worsening gastrointestinal symptoms, adverse effects, or loss of response to CT-P13. Drug persistence was analyzed through survival analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 758 patients with IBD were identified. Reverse switching was observed in 75 patients (9.9%). Patients with reverse switching were predominantly female (70.7%). Gastrointestinal symptoms (25.5%) and dermatological symptoms (21.8%) were the most commonly reported reasons for reverse switching. In 9 patients (12.0%), loss of response to CT-P13 was the reason for reverse switching. Improvement of reported symptoms was seen in 73.3% of patients after reverse switching and 7 out of 9 patients (77.8%) with loss of response regained response. Infliximab persistence was equal between patients who were reverse-switched and those who were maintained on CT-P13.

CONCLUSIONS

Reverse switching occurred in 9.9% of patients, predominantly for biosimilar-attributed adverse effects. Switching back to originator infliximab seems effective in patients who experience adverse effects, worsening gastrointestinal symptoms, or loss of response after switching from originator infliximab to CT-P13.

Does Similarity Breed Contempt? A Review of the Use of Biosimilars in Inflammatory Bowel Disease

The introduction of therapeutic monoclonal antibodies directed against tumor necrosis factor-α has revolutionized the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) by improving quality of life, decreasing the frequency and length of hospital admissions, and reducing corticosteroid use. Nevertheless, biologics are very expensive, substantially contributing to the cost of care for patients with IBD. To reduce this cost and improve treatment access, biosimilars, which are therapeutic monoclonal antibodies (biologicals) similar to but not identical to the reference biologic, were introduced. Despite their potential benefits, the adoption and uptake of biosimilars have varied considerably across the USA and Europe. Here, we highlight the current biosimilar therapeutic landscape, discuss barriers to their use, and provide an overview of published studies evaluating the efficacy and safety of biosimilars in IBD.

25 years of anti-TNF treatment for inflammatory bowel disease: lessons from the past and a look to the future

Anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) antibodies have been widely used for approximately 25 years now. The first clinical observations in patients with refractory Crohn's disease rapidly responding to infliximab prompted accelerated clinical development and approval for this indication. However, many questions remained unanswered when this treatment came to market related to maintenance schedules, pharmacokinetics, toxicity and positioning. Many of these open questions were addressed by investigators and sponsors during more than two decades of clinical use. The authors were among the first to use infliximab in Crohn's disease and felt that now is a good time to look back and draw lessons from the remarkable anti-TNF story. Even today, new insights continue to appear. But more importantly, what was learnt in the past 25 years has created a platform for future development of even stronger and safer therapies. We should not forget to learn from the past.

The Great Debate With IBD Biosimilars: Pro: Biosimilars Should Be Routinely Used as a First Line Biologic and May Be Switched From Reference Biologics

The relatively high cost of anti-TNF agents and looming or actual expiry of patents for several biologics have led to the development of "highly similar" versions of the "originator" drugs called "biosimilars." The approval of biosimilars has been based on "extrapolation," whereby approval is granted in licensed indications for the reference product without the need for clinical trials. We discuss efficacy and safety data in support of biosimilar use from prospective studies, switching from originator biologic, impact on immunogenicity, pharmaco-economic, and practical considerations for clinicians.

Safety of switching between rituximab biosimilars in onco-hematology

Comparable clinical efficacy and safety of the reference rituximab (MABTHERA) and its biosimilars has been established in randomized trials. However, safety concerns are often raised when switching from reference to biosimilar products and between different biosimilars. In this prospective observational study we aimed at evaluating the safety of switching between reference and biosimilar rituximab (TRUXIMA and RIXATHON) at Trento General Hospital (Italy). All patients (n = 83) with Non Hodgkin’s Lymphoma (NHL, n = 72) and Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL, n = 11) who received rituximab between March 2018 and March 2019 were asked to take part in the study. In 2017 and 2018 two tenders were carried out and two different biosimilars became available in the hospital, these were used sequentially. Thus, patients with or without previous treatments with the originator rituximab either received a biosimilar or were switched between different biosimilars. The incidence of adverse events in these groups of patients is described. The study population received 465 rituximab infusions and all received biosimilars. Fifty patients (60%) experienced at least one switch between different biosimilars or between rituximab originator and biosimilar, whereas 33 (40%) received one of the two biosimilars and one patient received reference rituximab. Adverse events (n = 146) were reported in 71 patients (84.5%). Treatment-related grade 3–4 events were reported in 5 patients (5.9%), whereas grade 1 rituximab related infusion events were observed in 6 patients (7.1%). No safety signal emerged in association with the use of a specific biosimilar nor with the practice of switching. Adverse events were similar, in terms of seriousness and frequency, to those described in the literature, providing further support to the clinical safety of rituximab biosimilars.

Switching from Infliximab to Biosimilar in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Review of Existing Literature and Best Practices

Biosimilars are highly similar but nonidentical biologic agents with no differences in clinical efficacy and safety when compared to bio-originator products. Considering the long-term costs of managing inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), biosimilars, through economic competition, provide an opportunity for cost savings to payors, may increase access to IBD medications, and could decrease health care spending in the long run. Studies investigating the use of biosimilars in IBD have shown a comparable clinical efficacy and safety profile compared to originator products. Moreover, studies have also suggested that solitary switches between bio-originators and biosimilars are acceptable and do not lead to worsening disease burden or increased immunogenicity or safety concerns. Despite available data and proposed benefits of biosimilars, skepticism about the widespread adoption of biosimilars throughout the United States continues to be present and creates many barriers. Herein, we detail the real-world, nonmedical switching experiences of 2 IBD centers in the United States and review best practices, which can be used as a potential roadmap for successful biosimilar adoption in other institutions.

Switching From Reference Infliximab to Biosimilar CT-P13 Did Not Change Quality of Life in Stable Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients

Background

Quality of life (QoL) data for patients with inflammatory bowel disease switched from the reference infliximab to biosimilar CT-P13 is lacking. This study aims to demonstrate noninferiority for QoL and efficacy after switching.

Methods

OoL and clinical efficacy were measured prior to and after 2, 4, and 6 CT-P13 infusions.

Results

One hundred seventy-eight patients were included. Noninferiority was established for QoL [ratio 97.95% (95% confidence interval 95.93 to 100.01)] and efficacy [difference -0.02 (95% confidence interval -0.68 to 0.64)]. Five patients reported 6 nonrelated, serious adverse events.

Conclusions

Switching from reference infliximab to CT-P13 did not affect the QoL or disease activity and was well tolerated.

Effectiveness of Switching from Reference Product Infliximab to Infliximab-Dyyb in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease in an Integrated Healthcare System in the United States: A Retrospective, Propensity Score-Matched, Non-Inferiority Cohort Study

PURPOSE

The aim was to compare outcomes in adult patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) who switched to infliximab-dyyb with those who remained on reference product (RP) infliximab in the United States (US) in a retrospective, propensity score-matched, non-inferiority cohort trial.

METHODS

This study was a retrospective, non-inferiority study conducted within a US integrated healthcare system and included adult patients with a confirmed diagnosis of Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis. A 1:1 propensity score matching was utilized to match patients who switched to infliximab-dyyb during the period April 2016-March 2018 to patients who remained on RP infliximab. The non-inferiority margin was set at + 10% of the upper limit. The primary outcome was a composite measure of disease worsening requiring acute care after the index date of switching to infliximab-dyyb or continuing RP infliximab. Disease worsening requiring acute care was defined as any IBD-related emergency room visit, hospitalization, or surgery. The secondary outcome was the composite measure of disease worsening requiring acute care or treatment failure. A switch to another biologic or tofacitinib was a proxy for treatment failure. All patients were followed for up to 9 months.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, the matched cohort included 1409 patients in the infliximab-dyyb group and 1409 patients in the RP infliximab group. The overall mean age (± standard deviation) was 47.7 ± 17.0 years, 50.9% of patients were of male gender, and 51.8% of patients had Crohn's disease, while the remainder of the cohort had ulcerative colitis. There were 144 patients (10.2%) in the infliximab-dyyb group and 245 patients (17.4%) in the RP infliximab group who experienced disease worsening requiring acute care (P < 0.01 for non-inferiority). There were 347 patients (24.6%) in the infliximab-dyyb group who experienced disease worsening requiring acute care or treatment failure compared to 375 patients (26.6%) who remained on RP infliximab (P < 0.01 for non-inferiority).

CONCLUSION

There was no increased risk of (1) disease worsening requiring acute care or (2) disease worsening requiring acute care or treatment failure in patients with IBD who switched from RP infliximab to infliximab-dyyb when compared to patients who remained on RP infliximab in this US population. Infliximab-dyyb is an option for patients with IBD who need to use RP infliximab.

Biosimilars in Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Over the past 2 decades, biological therapy with monoclonal antibodies targeting tumor necrosis factor-α has become a cornerstone of treatment of patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Although clinically effective, the biological therapies remain expensive, and their availability and utilization have been at times limited due to their high costs. Biosimilars are biological products similar to but not identical to the original biological agent or "reference biologic," also called "originator biologic." It is hoped that the use of biosimilars might enable these agents to become more available and, thus, decrease further expenditures related to the use of the original reference agents such as infliximab and adalimumab. In this study, we review the currently available evidence and shortcomings of these data supporting the use of biosimilars for the treatment of patients with inflammatory bowel disease, including their efficacy and safety as related to initiating therapy with biosimilar agents or switching between reference and biosimilar biologic agents.

Switching biologics used in inflammatory bowel diseases: how to deal with in practice?

Inflammatory bowel disease patients do not all respond to biological treatment since several patients will initially respond but will lose response or develop side effects over time. In such cases, a switch from one biologic to another offers a valuable clinical solution. This requires to evaluate both patient and drug profiles in combination with the reason(s) for switching in order to adequately select the second-line biologic. Therapeutic drug monitoring is obviously a useful tool but is currently limited to the use of anti-TNFα. In this review paper, we provide overview and guidance on switching biologics in clinical practice, with the emphasis on the motivations for switching, the selection of the second-line biologic, as well as explanations on how and when to switch.

Switching from IFX originator to biosimilar CT-P13 does not impact effectiveness,safety and immunogenicity in a large cohort of IBD patients

BACKGROUND

Switching from IFX originator to CT-P13 is safe; however, little data on immunogenicity exists.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Consecutive IBD patients on IFX originator were switched to CT-P13 and followed-up for 12 months. Clinical activity, infliximab trough levels (ITLs), anti-drug antibodies (ATIs), and adverse events were recorded at predefined timepoints (baseline, second CT-P13 infusion, 6 and 12 months). The outcomes investigated were immunogenicity, pharmacokinetics, effectiveness and safety.

RESULTS

119 patients were switched to CT-P13 after a median time with IFX of 5.8 years. No changes in mean ITLs were observed. ATIs were detected in 30 patients (25.2%): 14 before and 16 after switch. Mean persistent ATIs were significantly higher compared to mean transient ones (109.74 ng/mL ±84.70 vs 18.22 ng/mL ±11.37, p < 0.001), with significantly lower ITLs associated (mean 0.32 µg/mL ±0.6 vs 3.08 µg/mL ±3.22, p < 0.001). A significant decrease of patients in steroid-fee clinical remission was observed after the switch (p = 0.004), with subsequent improvement at 6 months (p = 0.005). Eighteen patients (15.1%) discontinued IFX, only 6 (5%) for loss of response.

CONCLUSIONS

Switching from infliximab originator to CT-P13 seems safe and effective, without differences in immunogenicity. A temporary reduction of clinical benefit after switching could be potentially explained by a 'nocebo-effect response'.

Long-term effectiveness and pharmacokinetics of the infliximab biosimilar CT-P13 after switching from the originator during the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease

OBJECTIVE

Switching patients from the originator infliximab to a biosimilar is a measure to expand access to treatments and counteract its negative impact on healthcare budgets. However, industry-independent long-term studies on the effect of switching in real life to support the lack of switch-related problems in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients are sparse, as are studies addressing infliximab pharmacokinetic behaviour. The objectives were to investigate the effectiveness and the pharmacokinetics of CT-P13 after switching from originator infliximab in a real-world population of IBD patients with a follow-up of 2 years.

METHOD

Prospective, single-centre, observational 2 year study conducted in IBD adult patients with stable disease treated with the originator infliximab who were switched to CT-P13. Four time points were defined for follow-up: prior to the switch, 4-8 weeks after the switch, 8 months later, and 2 years later. Outcome measures were the proportion of patients with clinical, endoscopic and biochemical remission, and changes in biochemical inflammation markers (albumin, C-reactive protein, faecal calprotectin) and infliximab clearance.

RESULTS

42 IBD patients were switched, of which 36 (85.7%) remained on CT-P13 throughout the 2 year study period. Only two patients discontinued CT-P13 due to loss of response. The proportion of patients who displayed clinical, endoscopic and biochemical remission were unchanged during the follow-up (p<0.05) and no statistically significant changes were observed in the biochemical markers of disease activity. The median (IQR) clearance estimated for the infliximab originator before the change was 0.364 (0.321-0.415) L/day, and for the CT-P13 biosimilar it was 0.361 (0.323-0.415) L/day 4-8 weeks after the change, and 0.370 (0.334-0.419) L/day 2 years after (p=0.395).

CONCLUSION

Switching from originator infliximab to biosimilar CT-P13 did not affect the long-term clinical outcomes or the pharmacokinetic behaviour. This information provides the clinician more evidence for the success of switching and supports non-medical switching in adult IBD patients.

Infliximab concentrations in two non-switching cohorts of patients with inflammatory bowel disease: originator vs. biosimilar

Biosimilars are replacing originator compounds due to their similar effectiveness, safety and pharmacokinetics. Our objective was to compare the differences in pharmacokinetics and clinical outcomes between the originator infliximab (Ifx) and the biosimilar CT-P13 in a patient cohort with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Our cohort study included 86 patients from a historical and a prospective cohort from the start of infliximab treatment to 22 weeks later. Serum infliximab, antidrug antibody levels and other serum biomarkers were measured at weeks 0, 2, 6, 14 and 22. Remission outcomes were evaluated at weeks 14 and 22. Drug levels were measured prospectively and analysed using MANOVA. Of the 86 patients, 44 (51%) and 42 (49%) were administered the originator and CT-P13, respectively. Originator trough levels were higher than the biosimilar trough levels (35 vs. 21, 20.1 vs. 11, 6.6 vs. 2.9 and 4.3 vs. 1.7 μg/mL at weeks 2, 6, 14 and 22, respectively). A post-hoc analysis demonstrated changes in mean serum drug levels over time (p < 0.001) and according to the drug employed (p = 0.001). At week 22, 13 (81%) patients administered the originator achieved clinical remission compared with 5 (19%) patients with the biosimilar (p = 0.02). None of the patients administered the originator withdrew from the treatment compared with 7 for the biosimilar. During the study, there were significant differences in serum infliximab levels between the originator and the CT-P13 in the patients with IBD. The clinical outcomes were influenced by the type of compound administered.

Evolution of infliximab biosimilar in inflammatory bowel disease: from intravenous to subcutaneous CT-P13

INTRODUCTION

Biologic drugs have significantly improved the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD). However, the availability of these drugs is limited by their high cost. Infliximab was the first biologic to be approved for inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). After its patent expired other manufactures developed biosimilar versions, among which CT-P13, and licensed them thorough an expedite process.

AREAS COVERED

The aim of this review is to summarize the available evidence on CT-P13 use in IBD, with particular interest in the phase II trials of a subcutaneous version of CT-P13.

EXPERT OPINION

Biosimilars, such as CT-P13, are an important resource for health-care systems. Although CT-P13 approval in IBD was based on extrapolation, subsequent studies confirmed its clinical equivalence to originator infliximab. A new subcutaneous formulation of CT-P13 showed promising results in phase I and II trials in both CD and UC. Clinical efficacy and safety were comparable and interestingly serum drug doses appeared to be more stable than conventional intravenous CT-P13. If these preliminary results will be confirmed, the first sub-cutaneous version of infliximab could soon be available for IBD.

Systematic Review: Non-medical Switching of Infliximab to CT-P13 in Inflammatory Bowel Disease

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Biosimilar approval, such as Inflectra™ (CT-P13) for treating ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD), has reduced direct drug costs. Though clinicians are comfortable with biosimilar use in treatment-naïve patients, there are concerns in some jurisdictions that there are insufficient data from well-controlled trials to support non-medical switching. A systematic review, along with a critical assessment of the study design, was conducted to assess the potential impact of switching stable CD/UC patients from infliximab to CT-P13.

METHODS

A literature search using PubMed and abstracts/posters from 3 major gastroenterology conferences from 2014 to 2018 was completed. Two individual reviewers extracted data from each relevant report and compiled it into evidence tables to facilitate descriptive analyses. Key randomized trial and observational study designs were critically assessed to contextualize data relevance.

RESULTS

A total of 49 reports (3 randomized controlled trials, 40 observational trials, and 1 case series) were included. Most studies revealed no efficacy, safety, or immunogenicity concerns with non-medical switch. Limitations of supporting data include a small number of randomized controlled trials; predominance of observational studies with varying outcome assessments and lack of appropriate controls; and scarcity of research on biosimilar switch long-term effects.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of studies suggested non-medical switch is safe. However, clinicians and regulatory bodies should be aware of differences and limitations in study designs when making inferences about the risks and benefits of switching stable IBD patients to biosimilars.

Evaluating Efficacy, Safety, and Pharmacokinetics After Switching From Infliximab Originator to Biosimilar CT-P13: Experience From a Large Tertiary Referral Center

BACKGROUND

The use of infliximab biosimilar CT-P13 has increased in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Nevertheless, doubts about switching from infliximab originator to biosimilar still exist among patients and health care professionals.

METHODS

Our tertiary referral center underwent a mandatory switch from infliximab originator to CT-P13 in 2017. We investigated pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and safety of this switch. The primary endpoint was infliximab discontinuation within 6 months of switching. Secondary endpoints included loss of clinical remission, need for treatment optimization, adverse events, evolution of patient-reported outcome, C-reactive protein, infliximab trough levels, and antidrug-antibodies.

RESULTS

A total of 361 patients (54.0% male, 70.0% Crohn's disease, 55.6% in clinical remission) were enrolled. Infliximab discontinuation within 6 months was observed in 4%. Loss of clinical remission, adverse events, and antidrug-antibodies were identified in only 2.0%, 2.2%, and 1.1% of patients, respectively. C-reactive protein concentrations and infliximab trough levels remained stable. Independent factors associated with remission at 6 months were lower PRO2 at switch (HR 6.024; 95% CI, 4.878-8.000; P < 0.0001) and higher hemoglobin levels (HR 1.383; 95% CI, 1.044-2.299; P = 0.018).

CONCLUSIONS

Switching from infliximab originator to CT-P13 was not associated with an increased risk of treatment discontinuation, loss of clinical remission, or adverse events. No significant changes in infliximab trough levels or immunogenicity could be identified.

Biosimilars to Antitumor Necrosis Factor Agents in Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Anti- tumor Necrosis Factor (anti-TNF) agents are the backbone treatment of moderate to severe cases of inflammatory bowel disease. One of the main drawbacks of these agents is the high cost. The introduction of biosimilar products to anti-TNF agents is expected to lower the cost. Health care providers ought to be aware of the available data that addresses the safety and efficacy of biosimilars in IBD patients. This article outlines the current evidence-based data regarding the available biosimilar products, their safety, efficacy and how to deal with patients’ concerns.

Patients' perspectives after switching from infliximab to biosimilar CT-P13 in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: A 12-month prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Patients' perspectives after switching from infliximab to a biosimilar have yet to be assessed.

AIM

To assess patients' perspectives in a prospective manner after switching from infliximab to CT-P13.

METHODS

113 consecutive patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) on maintenance therapy with infliximab were switched to CT-P13. Patients' perspectives were assessed by questionnaires, including the Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire (BMQ) and FACIT-F (questionnaire regarding fatigue), and patient-reported outcomes (IBD disability index) at the inclusion and after the fourth CT-P13 infusion.

RESULTS

After one year, the patients' perspectives did not change after the switch according to BMQ-general, BMQ-specific necessity and BMQ-specific concerns subscales. No difference was observed in the mean IBD-DI score, while a significant improvement in fatigue was observed according to the FACIT-F questionnaire. Patients' concerns were raised about the use of biosimilars and the risks of switching with a significant improvement after switching (65% vs. 42%, respectively, p = 0.01). Fourteen (12.4%) patients experienced loss of response to CT-P13, including 12 with restoration of steroid-free clinical remission after CT-P13 dose optimization.

CONCLUSION

Although some concerns were reported, no difference was observed in patients' perspectives after switching from infliximab to CT-P13.

Outcomes of Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Diseases Switched From Maintenance Therapy With a Biosimilar to Remicade

BACKGROUND & AIMS

There is evidence that it is safe and effective for patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) to switch from maintenance therapy with an original infliximab drug to a biosimilar, but little is known about outcomes of reverse switches and/or multiple switches. We aimed to evaluate the effects of a reverse switch (from a biosimilar to Remicade) in a real-life cohort.

METHODS

We performed a prospective observational study of 174 unselected and consecutive patients with IBD (136 with Crohn's disease [CD] and 38 with ulcerative colitis [UC]) who received maintenance therapy with the biosimilar in Hungary. In September 2017, patients were switched from the biosimilar (CT-P13) to Remicade, due to reimbursement policies. In our cohort, 8% (n = 14) patients had been previously exposed to the originator Remicade. We collected clinical and biochemical information from patients at baseline (time of the switch) and 16 and 24 weeks thereafter. Clinical remission was defined as a Crohn's disease activity index <150 points or no fistula drainage, or a partial Mayo score <3 points for patients with UC. Serum drug trough levels and anti-drug antibodies were measured at baseline and week 16.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in the proportion of patients in clinical remission at week 8 before the switch (82.5% with CD and 82.9% with UC), at baseline (80.6% with CD and 81.6% with UC), at week 16 (77.5% with CD and 83.7% with UC), or at week 24 (CD 76.3% with CD and 84.9% with UC) (P = .60 among groups for patients with CD and P = .98 among groups for patients with UC). For all patients, mean serum trough levels of infliximab were 5.33 ± 4.70 μg/mL at baseline and 5.69 ± 4.94 μg/mL at week 16 (P = .71); we did not find significant differences in prevalence of anti-drug antibody at baseline (16.2%) compared with week 16 (16.9%) (P = .87). Four infusion reactions occurred, until week 24 of follow up. There was no difference in outcomes or trough or antidrug antibody levels between patients with or without previous exposure to Remicade.

CONCLUSIONS

We collected data from a real-life cohort of patients with CD or UC who were switched from maintenance therapy with a biosimilar to Remicade or were treated with only Remicade. No significant changes were observed in remission, trough levels, or antidrug antibodies in patients switched from the biosimilar to Remicade. No new safety signals were detected.

Hemolytic anemia after switching from infliximab originator to biosimilar CT-P13 in a patient with inflammatory bowel disease: A case report

Available data on switching from originator infliximab to CT-P13 in patients with inflammatory bowel disease are reassuring regarding safety and efficacy outcomes. However, monitoring of such patients, especially in the early phase after switching, is important given the possibility that rare side effects might occur, as illustrated here.

The Effect of Initiation of Anti-TNF Therapy on the Subsequent Direct Health Care Costs of Inflammatory Bowel Disease

BACKGROUND

Anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) drugs are highly effective in the treatment of moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC), but they are very costly. Due to their effectiveness, they could potentially reduce future health care spending on other medical therapies, hospitalization, and surgery. The impact of downstream costs has not previously been quantified in a real-world population-based setting.

METHODS

We used the University of Manitoba IBD Database to identify all persons in a Canadian province with CD or UC who received anti-TNF therapy between 2004 and 2016. All inpatient, outpatient, and drug costs were enumerated both in the year before anti-TNF initiation and for up to 5 years after anti-TNF initiation. Costs before and after anti-TNF initiation were compared, and multivariate linear regression analyses were performed to look for predictors of higher costs after anti-TNF initiation.

RESULTS

A total of 928 people with IBD (676 CD, 252 UC) were included for analyses. The median cost of health care in the year before anti-TNF therapy was $4698 for CD vs $6364 for UC. The median cost rose to $39,749 and $49,327, respectively, in the year after anti-TNF initiation, and to $210,956 and $245,260 in the 5 years after initiation for continuous anti-TNF users. Inpatient and outpatient costs decreased in the year after anti-TNF initiation by 12% and 7%, respectively, when excluding the cost of anti-TNFs.

CONCLUSIONS

Direct health care expenditures markedly increase after anti-TNF initiation and continue to stay elevated over pre-initiation costs for up to 5 years, with only small reductions in the direct costs of non-drug-related health care.

Mechanism-Based Treatment Strategies for IBD: Cytokines, Cell Adhesion Molecules, JAK Inhibitors, Gut Flora, and More

BACKGROUND

Although TNF inhibitors revolutionized the therapy of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), we have been reaching a point where other therapies with different mechanisms of action are necessary. A rising number of elderly IBD patients with contraindications to established therapies and a growing group of patients losing response to anti-TNF therapy compel us to find safer, better-tolerated, and, ideally, personalized treatment options. However, in order to choose the right drug to fit a patient, it is indispensable to understand the pathomechanism involved in IBD.

SUMMARY

The aim of this review is to explain the inflammatory signaling pathways in IBD and how to inhibit them with current and future therapeutic approaches. Next to biologic agents targeting inflammatory cytokines (anti-TNF agents, anti-IL-12/-23 agents, and specific inhibitors of IL-23), biologics blocking leukocyte trafficking to the gut (anti-integrin antibodies) are available nowadays. More recently, small molecules inhibiting the JAK-STAT pathway (JAK inhibitors) or preventing lymphocyte trafficking (sphingosine-1-phosphate modulators) have been approved or are under investigation. Furthermore, modifying the microbiota has potential therapeutic effects on IBD, and autologous hematopoietic or mesenchymal stem cell transplantation may be considered for a highly selected group of IBD patients.

KEY MESSAGE

Physicians should understand the different mechanisms of action of the potential therapies for IBD to select the right drug for the right patient.

Therapeutic drug monitoring-based dosing of TNF inhibitors in inflammatory bowel disease: the way forward?

Introduction: Secondary loss of response to anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy remains a challenge in the clinical management of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients. A frequently observed reason for secondary loss of response to TNF blockers is inadequate drug exposure and sub-therapeutic serum drug concentrations. Areas covered: This review presents an overview of recent research on therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM)-based dosing with anti-TNF agents in IBD. The role of reactive and proactive TDM and different approaches on how to optimize anti-TNF treatment are discussed. Expert opinion: Due to variations within and between patients, the 'one size fits all' theory does not apply to all IBD patients receiving anti-TNF agents. Timing of TDM (i.e. reactive versus proactive) is a matter of debate. Both strategies might optimize anti-TNF treatment, although most trials did not show a clinical benefit compared to conventional dosing up to now. So-called dashboard systems might have an additive value in the optimization of anti-TNF treatment, since these tools enable clinicians to really personalize anti-TNF treatment.

Effectiveness and safety of biosimilar infliximab (CT-P13) in a real-life setting in patients with Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis

Objective: To assess the effectiveness and safety of biosimilar infliximab (CT-P13) in a real-life setting in adults with moderate-to-severe active Crohn’s disease (CD) or ulcerative colitis (UC).

Methods: This multi-centre, observational cohort study was conducted at medical centres in Romania, Czech Republic, and Bulgaria. Effectiveness was measured using the Crohn’s Disease Activity Index (CDAI) for CD or partial Clinical Activity Index (pCAI) for UC. Quality-of-life (QoL) was measured using the Short Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (SIBDQ). Safety was assessed according to treatment withdrawals and adverse events (AEs) monitoring. Analyses were performed in the safety population and were reported based on the observed case (OC) or last observation carried forward (LOCF) method.

Results: Altogether, 85 patients with CD (n = 38) or UC (n = 47) received biosimilar infliximab for up to 30 weeks. Most patients (n = 68; 80.0%) had no prior exposure to infliximab. At the end of treatment, 65.8% (95% CI = 49.8–78.9) of CD patients and 55.3% (95% CI = 41.2–68.6) of UC patients showed a clinical response, and 47.4% (95% CI = 32.5–62.7) and 48.9% (95% CI = 35.3–62.8), respectively, were in remission. Statistically significant (p < 0.0001) improvements from baseline were observed in CDAI and pCAI scores (both LOCF). In the combined CD and UC population, SIBDQ was significantly improved (p < 0.0001) from baseline to end of treatment (OC). Two AEs (moderately severe infusion reactions) were judged by investigators to be definitely related to treatment, one of which led to treatment withdrawal.

Conclusion: Results align with those of previous studies demonstrating the effectiveness and safety of biosimilar infliximab in CD and UC.

Consensus report: clinical recommendations for the prevention and management of the nocebo effect in biosimilar-treated IBD patients

BACKGROUND

The nocebo effect is a negative effect of a pharmacological or nonpharmacological medical treatment that is induced by patients' expectations, and that is unrelated to the physiological action of the treatment. The nocebo effect can negatively affect treatment outcomes.

AIM

To develop evidence-based consensus recommendations for the prevention and management of the nocebo effect in biosimilar-treated patients with IBD.

METHODS

The "NOCE-BIO Consensus Group" was composed of 19 members from five European countries, and with different fields of expertise. A literature review on the nocebo effect, with specific focus on information about its prevention and management in biosimilar-treated IBD patients, was performed. Preliminary statements were formulated and voted on during a consensus group meeting held in Milan, Italy, in July 2018. A statement was accepted if >75% of participants voted 4 ("agree") or 5 ("strongly agree") on a scale of 1-5.

RESULTS

Consensus was reached on 11 recommendation statements. Seven statements reached consensus after one voting round and four statements reached consensus after two voting rounds. All statements were supported by very low-quality level of evidence. The panel agreed that patient-health-care provider relationship is a key driver of acceptance of biosimilars, which limits the risk of negative bias and the nocebo effect. Lack of knowledge among patients and health-care providers about the effectiveness and safety of biosimilars should be minimized. Education about biosimilars needs to be tailored to the individual patient, and positive framing is recommended.

CONCLUSIONS

The nocebo effect is under-recognised in the era of biosimilars, although it may negatively impact on the cost-savings of biosimilars. Future research should focus on the magnitude, the risk factors, the impact, and the management of the nocebo effect in biosimilars-treated IBD patients.

Efficacy and safety of biosimilar CT-P13 compared with originator infliximab in patients with active Crohn's disease: an international, randomised, double-blind, phase 3 non-inferiority study

BACKGROUND

The infliximab biosimilar CT-P13 was approved for use in Crohn's disease after clinical comparison with originator infliximab in ankylosing spondylitis and rheumatoid arthritis; however, concerns about such indication extrapolation have been expressed. This study investigated whether CT-P13 is non-inferior to infliximab in patients with Crohn's disease who were naive to biological therapy.

METHODS

In this randomised, multicentre, double-blind, phase 3 non-inferiority study, we enrolled patients with active Crohn's disease who had not responded to, or were intolerant to, non-biological treatments. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to receive CT-P13 then CT-P13, CT-P13 then infliximab, infliximab then infliximab, or infliximab then CT-P13, with switching occurring at week 30. Patients received 5 mg/kg CT-P13 or infliximab at weeks 0, 2, 6, and then every 8 weeks up to week 54. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with a decrease of 70 points or more in Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) from baseline to week 6. A non-inferiority margin of -20% was set (CT-P13 was non-inferior to infliximab if the lower limit of the two-sided 95% CI for the treatment difference was greater than -20). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02096861, and is completed.

FINDINGS

Between Aug 20, 2014, and Feb 15, 2017, 308 patients were assessed for eligibility, and 220 patients were enrolled: 111 were randomly assigned to initiate CT-P13 (56 to the CT-P13-CT-P13 group and 55 to the CT-P13-infliximab group) and 109 to initiate infliximab (54 to the infliximab-infliximab group and 55 to the infliximab-CT-P13 group). CDAI-70 response rates at week 6 were similar for CT-P13 (77 [69·4%, 95% CI 59·9 to 77·8] of 111) and infliximab (81 [74·3%, 95% CI 65·1 to 82·2] of 109; difference -4·9% [95% CI -16·9 to 7·3]), thereby establishing non-inferiority. Over the total study period, 147 (67%) patients experienced at least one treatment-emergent adverse event (36 [64%] in the CT-P13-CT-P13 group, 34 [62%] in the CT-P13-infliximab group, 37 [69%] in the infliximab-infliximab group, and 40 [73%] in the infliximab-CT-P13 group).

INTERPRETATION

This study showed non-inferiority of CT-P13 to infliximab in patients with active Crohn's disease. Biosimilar CT-P13 could be a new option for the treatment of active Crohn's disease.

FUNDING

Celltrion, Pfizer.

Switching from infliximab to biosimilar in inflammatory bowel disease: overview of the literature and perspective

BACKGROUND

Biological therapy has revolutionized the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). After the expiration of patents for biological innovator products, development of biosimilars increased. CT-P13 was the first biosimilar approved for the same indications as the reference product; however, the approval was based on extrapolated data from rheumatoid arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis. Our aim was to review clinical studies about switching from originator infliximab (IFX-O) to biosimilar infliximab (IXF-B) in IBD, focusing on recently published data and the future of biosimilars.

METHODS

The PubMed database was searched for original articles published up to 1 December 2018 reporting data on IFX-B in IBD.

RESULTS

A total of 29 studies assessing switching from IFX-O to IFX-B, 14 assessing induction therapy with IFX-B were found. Efficacy, safety and immunogenicity were discussed. Studies confirm that CT-P13 is safe and equally efficient as the reference product for both induction and maintenance therapy; and that switching from the reference product to biosimilar is non-inferior to continuous biosimilar use. However, efficacy and safety data on Flixabi (SB2) in IBD patients is lacking.

CONCLUSION

Switching from the originator to a biosimilar in patients with IBD is acceptable, although scientific and clinical evidence is lacking regarding reverse switching, multiple switching and cross-switching among biosimilars in IBD patients.

Biosimilars for inflammatory bowel disease: how can healthcare professionals help address patients' concerns?

The patent expiration of some biologics used in chronic conditions such as inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has led to the development of biosimilar monoclonal antibodies. The tailored regulatory approval route for biosimilar development ensures that approved biosimilars show similarity to their originators in terms of efficacy and safety, and avoids unnecessary repetition of clinical trials carried out with the originator product. However, some patients may still have concerns about using biosimilars and it is the responsibility of healthcare professionals (HCPs) to alleviate these concerns. Areas covered: This review highlights clinical and real-world evidence supporting efficacy and safety of biosimilars in patients with IBD. Moreover, based on international surveys, potential patient concerns are highlighted, along with possible actions HCPs can take to address these concerns. Expert commentary: The rising use of biosimilars in IBD is expected to have a positive impact on the availability of biologics and healthcare costs. Several biosimilars have been approved for use and more are likely to come to the market in the future; however, transitioning patients to biosimilars could pose an unexpected challenge without the help and support of HCPs.

Drug Survival and Immunogenicity After Switching From Remicade to Biosimilar CT-P13 in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients: Two-year Follow-up of a Prospective Observational Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

The infliximab biosimilar has entered daily inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) practice. However, real-life outcomes beyond 1 year after switching are scarce. We aimed to investigate the long-term drug survival, immunogenicity, and pharmacokinetics 2 years after switching to CT-P13 in IBD patients.

METHODS

We performed a single-center prospective observational cohort study in all Remicade-treated IBD patients who previously switched to CT-P13. We systematically documented reasons for discontinuation, trough levels, and antidrug antibodies to infliximab (ADAs) at baseline, week 16, week 52, and week 104. Clinical and biochemical disease activity (HBI, SCCAI, CRP) and adverse events were registered.

RESULTS

Eighty-three patients were enrolled, 57 had Crohn's disease, 24 had ulcerative colitis, and 2 were IBD-unclassified. At week 104, 55 of 83 (66%) patients remained on CT-P13, and 3 were lost to follow-up. Reasons for discontinuation were loss of response (n = 10), adverse events (n = 8), and disease remission (n = 7). ADAs were present in 5/83 patients at baseline (before switching), in 2 patients before week 52, and no subsequent ADAs were detected until week 104. Median trough levels and clinical and biochemical disease activity at baseline, week 16, week 52 and week 104 did not significantly change.

CONCLUSION

In a prospective cohort with >2-year follow-up, 66% of IBD patients continued CT-P13 after switching from Remicade. Two new cases with ADAs were observed in year 1, but subsequently no immunogenicity was detected. These results are reassuring and suggest that switching to CT-P13 does not impact long-term clinical outcomes. 10.1093/ibd/izy227_video1izy227.video15802479819001.