Effectiveness and safety of adalimumab biosimilar ABP 501 in Crohn's disease: an observational study

Switching from Adalimumab Reference Product to and Among Adalimumab Biosimilars Outside the USA: Insights for US Clinicians

Ten adalimumab biosimilars have been introduced in the United States (USA) since 2023, while adalimumab biosimilars have been available for several years in other countries. These experiences of biosimilar uptake outside the USA can inform US-based healthcare professionals on switching in real-life practice settings. Considerations include how healthcare professionals might meaningfully address patient concerns about outcomes to improve patient satisfaction. A search of the MEDLINE database was used to identify publications on switching to and among adalimumab biosimilars in an ex-US setting, with no restriction on publication language and using a time frame of 1 January 2017 through 12 December 2023, coinciding with the European Union approval of the first adalimumab biosimilar, adalimumab-atto, in March 2017. This narrative review aims to provide insights into the efficacy and safety of transitioning to and among adalimumab biosimilars in adult patients from clinical studies but also, more importantly, using real-world evidence (RWE) from outside the USA. Overall, RWE suggested that efficacy and outcomes were consistent in patients who underwent switching from the reference product (RP) across various immune-mediated inflammatory diseases when compared to patients who did not switch from the RP. The ex-US RWE of RP and biosimilar adalimumab switches generally reflected the experiences observed in clinical trials; however, RWE findings elucidated several challenges to biosimilar uptake, including patient education, provider training, and supportive policies.

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.

Adalimumab Biosimilar in Pediatric Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Retrospective Study from the Sicilian Network for Inflammatory Bowel Disease (SN-IBD)

BACKGROUND

The utilization of anti-tumor necrosis factor-α (anti-TNF-α) biosimilars in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is constantly increasing. However, pediatric data are limited. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness and safety of adalimumab biosimilar (ADL-BioS) in pediatric IBD patients.

METHODS

All consecutive pediatric IBD patients from the Sicilian Network for Inflammatory Bowel Disease cohort treated with ADL-BioS from 2019 to 2021 were recruited. Remission at weeks 14 and 52, treatment persistence, and adverse events were the endpoints of this study. Factors associated with clinical remission and treatment persistence were examined.

RESULTS

There were 41 patients in total. Nine (22%) patients were switched from the reference product to ADL-BioS. Two patients had multiple switches. Eleven months was the median follow-up period. Clinical remission was attained by 70.7% and 72.0% of patients on weeks 14 and 52, respectively. Four (9.8%) adverse events occurred (10.1/100 person-year). Treatment persistence was 85.4% at 1 and 2 years. Patients with a longer duration of disease had a higher probability of stopping their treatment (p = 0.036).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first real-world study that particularly addresses the use of ADL-BioS in pediatric IBD. With high rates of treatment persistence and a low frequency of non-serious side effects, ADL-BioS seems to be effective.

Treatment persistence and switching patterns of ABP 501 in European patients with inflammatory bowel disease

Background

Approval of the adalimumab (ADA) biosimilar ABP 501 for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) indications was based on the principle of extrapolation, without indication-specific clinical trial data.

Objectives

To evaluate the real-world treatment patterns of ABP 501 in patients with IBD.

Design

Retrospective analysis of pharmacy claims data from Germany and France.

Methods

Continuously insured adult IBD patients who initiated ABP 501 between October 2018 and March 2020 were included. Treatment persistence, adherence, and post-ABP 501 switching patterns were evaluated for two mutually exclusive groups: ADA-naïve patients (i.e. no baseline use of ADA products) and ADA-experienced patients (i.e. previously treated with ADA products).

Results

A total of 3362 German patients and 733 French patients were included, with 54.4% and 65.3% being ADA-naïve patients, respectively. Median persistence (95% CI) on ABP 501 was 10.9 months (9.8-11.6) in ADA-naïve patients and 14.2 months (12.7-15.2) in ADA-experienced patients in Germany; for the French cohort, ADA-naïve and -experienced patients had median persistence of 12.8 months (10.2-14.7) and 11.5 months (8.8-14.4), respectively. During the first 12 months of ABP 501 initiation, 53.7% of German patients and 51.0% of French patients were adherent to the therapy. About 20% of patients in both countries switched from ABP 501 to another targeted therapy. In the German cohort, ADA-naïve patients most frequently switched to non-tumor necrosis factor inhibitor biologics, but ADA-experienced patients most commonly switched to reference product (RP); in the French cohort, patients most often switched to RP regardless of prior exposure to ADA products.

Conclusion

About 50% of patients persisted on and were adherent to ABP 501 therapy during the first 12 months after treatment initiation in two large European countries. Post-ABP 501, switching patterns varied between countries, indicating diversified treatment practices warranting further research on reason(s) for switching and potential overall treatment outcomes.

Personalized Treatment for Crohn's Disease: Current Approaches and Future Directions

Crohn's disease is a complex, relapsing and remitting inflammatory disorder of the gastrointestinal tract with a variable disease course. While the treatment options for Crohn's disease have dramatically increased over the past two decades, predicting individual patient response to treatment remains a challenge. As a result, patients often cycle through multiple different therapies before finding an effective treatment which can lead to disease complications, increased costs, and decreased quality of life. Recently, there has been increased emphasis on personalized medicine in Crohn's disease to identify individual patients who require early advanced therapy to prevent complications of their disease. In this review, we summarize our current approach to management of Crohn's disease by identifying risk factors for severe or disabling disease and tailoring individual treatments to patient-specific goals. Lastly, we outline our knowledge gaps in implementing personalized Crohn's disease treatment and describe the future directions in precision medicine.

Comparison of Performances of Adalimumab Biosimilars SB5, ABP501, GP2017, and MSB11022 in Treating Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: A Real-Life, Multicenter, Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Adalimumab (ADA) biosimilars have entered the therapeutic armamentarium of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), allowing for the treatment of a greater number of patients for their reduced cost than the originator. However, comparative data on the efficacy and safety of the various ADA biosimilars remains scarce.We compare the efficacy and safety of ADA biosimilars SB5, ABP501, GP2017, and MSB11022 in treating IBD outpatients in a real-life Italian setting.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on consecutive IBD outpatients with complete clinical, laboratory, and endoscopic data. Clinical activity was measured using the Mayo score in ulcerative colitis (UC) and the Harvey-Bradshaw Index in Crohn's disease (CD). The primary endpoints were the following: (1) induction of remission in patients new to biologics and patients new to ADA but previously exposed to other anti-tumor necrosis factor agents or other biologics; (2) maintenance of remission in patients switched from the ADA originator to an ADA biosimilar; and (3) safety of various biosimilars.

RESULTS

A total of 533 patients were enrolled according to the inclusion criteria: 162 patients with UC and 371 patients with CD. Clinical remission was obtained in 79.6% of patients new to biologics and 59.2% of patients new to ADA but not to other biologics; clinical remission was maintained in 81.0% of patients switched from the originator, and adverse events were recorded in 6.7% of patients. There was no significant difference between the 4 ADA biosimilars for each predetermined endpoint.

CONCLUSIONS

Adalimumab biosimilars are effective and safe in IBD treatment, both in new patients and in patients switched from the ADA originator. No difference in efficacy and safety was found between ADA biosimilars.

Infliximab biosimilar-to-biosimilar switching in patients with inflammatory rheumatic disease: clinical outcomes in real-world patients from the DANBIO registry

OBJECTIVE

Successful uptake of biosimilars in rheumatology is limited by lack of real-world evidence regarding effectiveness of biosimilar-to-biosimilar switching. We investigated infliximab biosimilars CT-P13-to-GP1111 switching among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and axial spondyloarthritis (AxSpA).

METHODS

Observational cohort study from the DANBIO registry. Patients were classified as originator-naïve or originator-experienced. Retention rates of 1-year GP1111 treatment were explored (Kaplan-Meier). We identified baseline factors (at the time of switch) associated with withdrawal of GP1111 (multivariable Cox-regression analyses with HRs including originator treatment history). Changes in subjective and objective measures of disease activity 4 months before and after the switch were assessed in individual patients.

RESULTS

Of 1605 patients (685 RA, 314 PsA and 606 AxSpA, median disease duration was 9 years, 37% in Clinical Disease Activity Index/Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score remission), 1171 were originator-naïve. Retention rates at 1-year were 83% (95% CI: 81% to 85%) and 92% (95% CI: 90% to 95%) for the originator-naïve and originator-experienced, respectively. GP1111 retention rates were higher in originator-experienced compared to originator-naïve with RA (HR=0.4 (95% CI: 0.2 to 0.7)) and PsA (HR=0.2 (95% CI: 0.1 to 0.8)), but not significantly for AxSpA: HR=0.6 (95% CI: 0.3 to 1.2). Lower disease activity was associated with higher retention. Changes in disease activity preswitch and postswitch were close to zero.

CONCLUSION

This real-world observational study of more than 1600 patients with inflammatory arthritis showed high 1-year retention following a nationwide infliximab biosimilar-to-biosimilar switch. Retention was higher in originator-experienced and in patients with low disease activity, suggesting outcomes to be affected by patient-related rather than drug-related factors.

Discontinuation and Switchback After Non-Medical Switching from Originator Tumor Necrosis Factor Alpha (TNF) Inhibitors to Biosimilars: A Meta-Analysis of Real-World Studies from 2012 to 2018

INTRODUCTION

To examine the prevalence rates of biosimilar discontinuation and switchback to the originator tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF) inhibitors following non-medical switch (NMS) in patients.

METHODS

Real-world studies reporting biosimilar discontinuation and switchback rates following NMS published between January 2012 and August 2018 were identified through a systematic literature review. A meta-analysis estimated the annualized discontinuation and switchback rates. A subsequent meta-analysis assessed annualized incremental discontinuation rate among studies reporting both discontinuation rates in patients who underwent an NMS (switchers) and patients who remained on originators (non-switchers).

RESULTS

A total of 66 publications were identified: 31 in gastroenterology, 32 in rheumatology, and 3 in both. Half of the studies reported switchback rates; only 9 studies reported discontinuation rates for both switchers and non-switchers. Across studies, the mean/range sample size of the NMS patient population was 136/9-1641; mean/range follow-up was 10/3-24 months. Annualized biosimilar discontinuation rate was 21% (95% confidence interval [CI] 18%, 25%). Switchback rate was 14% (95% CI 10%, 17%) among all NMS patients and 62% (95% CI 44%, 80%) among discontinuers. The mean/range sample size of switchers and non-switchers was 344/89-1621 and 768/19-2870, respectively; mean/range follow-up was 11/6-18 and 12/6-8 months, respectively. Annualized incremental biosimilar discontinuation rate was 18% (95% CI 4%, 31%).

CONCLUSION

Biosimilar discontinuation was found to be prevalent among patients who underwent an NMS from an originator TNF inhibitor to its biosimilar(s) in the real world. In addition, switchback to the originator TNF inhibitors was common following biosimilar discontinuation. Careful consideration is necessary when switching patients already on an originator TNF inhibitor to its biosimilar(s). Main limitations included the heterogeneity of the studies and the limited comparability of the data.

Adalimumab Biosimilar GP2017 versus Adalimumab Originator in Treating Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: A Real-Life, Multicenter, Observational Study

The approval of adalimumab (ADA) biosimilars for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has reduced the cost of treatment. While several ADA biosimilars are currently available, comparative data on the ADA biosimilar GP2017 (Hyrimoz^TM) and its originator (Humira^TM) in IBD are lacking. We compared the efficacy and safety of GP2017 versus originator in IBD outpatients in an Italian real-life setting. This retrospective analysis enrolled consecutive IBD patients with complete clinical, laboratory, and endoscopic data. Clinical activity was assessed with the Mayo score in ulcerative colitis (UC) and the Harvey–Bradshaw Index in Crohn’s disease (CD). The primary endpoints were the induction of remission and the safety of GP2017 versus ADA originator. One hundred and thirty-four patients (30.6% with UC and 69.4% with CD, median age 38 years) were enrolled: 62 (46.3%) patients were treated with GP2017, and 72 (53.7%) with ADA originator; 118 (88.1%) patients were naïve to ADA. Clinical remission was obtained in 105 (78.4%) patients, during a median follow-up of 12 months, 82.3% and 75% in the GP2017 and ADA originator groups, respectively (p = 0.311). Treatment was well tolerated in both groups. This analysis of real-world data suggests that GP2017 and its originator are equivalent in terms of efficacy and safety in patients with IBD.

Adalimumab and ABP 501 in the Treatment of a Large Cohort of Patients with Inflammatory Arthritis: A Real Life Retrospective Analysis

The recent introduction of ABP 501, an adalimumab biosimilar, in the treatment of rheumatic diseases was supported by a comprehensive comparability exercise with its originator. On the other hand, observational studies comparing adalimumab and ABP 501 in inflammatory arthritis are still lacking. The main aim of this study is to compare the clinical outcomes of the treatment with adalimumab, both the originator and ABP 501, in a large cohort of patients affected by autoimmune arthritis in a real life setting. We retrospectively analysed the baseline characteristics and the retention rate in a cohort of patients who received at least a course of adalimumab (originator or ABP 501) from January 2003 to December 2020. We stratified the study population according to adalimumab use: naive to original (oADA), naive to ABP 501 (bADA) and switched from original to ABP 501 (sADA). The oADA, bADA and sADA groups included, respectively, 724, 129 and 193 patients. In each group, the majority of patients had a diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis. The total observation period was 9805.6 patient-months. The 18-month retentions rate in oADA, bADA and sADA was, respectively, 81.5%, 84.0% and 88.0% (p > 0.05). The factors influencing the adalimumab retention rate were an axial spondylarthritis diagnosis (Hazard Ratio (HR) 0.70; p = 0.04), switch from oADA to ABP 501 (HR 0.53; p = 0.02) and year of prescription (HR 1.04; p = 0.04). In this retrospective study, patients naive to the adalimumab originator and its biosimilar ABP 501 showed the same retention rate. Patients switching from the originator to biosimilar had a higher retention rate, even though not statistically significant, when compared to naive.

Switching from Adalimumab Originator to Biosimilar: Clinical Experience in Patients with Hidradenitis Suppurativa

Adalimumab is currently the only biological medicine approved by the FDA for the treatment of hidradenitis suppurativa (HS). The breakout of biosimilar drugs made them more accessible due to their impact on pharmacoeconomics. However, packaging, formulation, or excipients are unique characteristics of each drug. In that way, switching from adalimumab originator to biosimilar and between biosimilars could have implications in the clinical practice. The objective of this study is to describe our clinical experience in switching from adalimumab originator to biosimilar and switching back again. A single-center retrospective cohort study was conducted that included seventeen patients with HS treated with adalimumab originator in the maintenance phase, and that achieved Hidradenitis Suppurativa Clinical Response (HiSCR), who were switched to adalimumab biosimilar for no medical reasons. The reason for the change was to improve pharmacoeconomic efficiency, following our hospital policies on biologics. Median duration with adalimumab originator treatment before switching was 48 weeks. After switching, 41.2% of patients maintained HiSCR response without additional issues, while 58.8% (10/17) reported problems after the change. Switching from adalimumab originator to biosimilar in well-controlled patients could imply problems in efficacy and adherence. Switching back to adalimumab originator appears to solve most of the problems, but some patients can lose confidence in the drug and discontinue it. It would be worthwhile to evaluate the benefit–risk ratio individually when switching an HS patient to adalimumab biosimilar.

How to Choose the Biologic Therapy in a Bio-Naïve Patient with Inflammatory Bowel Disease

The availability of biologic therapies in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is increasing significantly. This represents more options to treat patients, but also more difficulties in choosing the therapies, especially in the context of bio-naïve patients. Most evidence of safety and efficacy came from clinical trials comparing biologics with placebo, with a lack of head-to-head studies. Network meta-analysis of biologics and real-world studies have been developed to solve this problem. Despite the results of these studies, there are also other important factors to consider before choosing the biologic, such as patient preferences, comorbidities, genetics, and inflammatory markers. Given that resources are limited, another important aspect is the cost of biologic therapy, since biosimilars are widely available and have been demonstrated to be effective with a significant decrease in costs. In this review, we summarize the evidence comparing biologic therapy in both Crohn´s disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) in different clinical situations. We also briefly synthesize the evidence related to predictors of biologic response, as well as the biologic use in extraintestinal manifestations and the importance of the drug-related costs.

Effectiveness and Safety of Nonmedical Switch From Adalimumab Originator to SB5 Biosimilar in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: Twelve-Month Follow-Up From the TABLET Registry

BACKGROUND

Few data are currently available about SB5 in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness and safety of SB5 in a cohort of patients with IBD in stable remission switched from the adalimumab (ADA) originator and in a cohort of patients with IBD naïve to ADA.

METHODS

We prospectively enrolled patients with IBD who started ADA treatment with SB5 (naïve cohort) and those who underwent a nonmedical switch from the ADA originator to SB5 (switching cohort). Clinical remission and safety were assessed at baseline and at 3, 6, and 12 months. In addition, in a small cohort of patients who were switched, we assessed the ADA serum trough levels and antidrug antibodies at baseline, 3, and 6 months.

RESULTS

In the naïve cohort, the overall remission rate at 12 months was 60.42%, whereas in the switching cohort it was 89.02%. Fifty-three (36.3%) patients experienced an adverse event, and injection site pain was the most common; it was significantly more frequent in the switching cohort (P = 0.001). No differences were found in terms of ADA serum trough levels at baseline, 3, and 6 months after switching. No patient developed antidrug antibodies after the switch.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that SB5 seemed effective and safe in IBD, both in the naïve cohort and in the switching cohort. Further studies are needed to confirm these data in terms of mucosal healing.

State-of-the-art surgery for Crohn's disease: Part I-small intestine/ileal disease

The management of Crohn's disease has evolved significantly over the past 20 years. The arrival of biologic therapies has altered not only the management and outcomes but also rates for refractory disease requiring surgery. New surgical techniques have paralleled these medical advances, and this article will provide an overview of these new modalities as well as their outcomes. This is the first of a three-part series and will focus on terminal ileal and ileocolic disease.

Comparative effectiveness of two adalimumab biosimilars in 1318 real-world patients with inflammatory rheumatic disease mandated to switch from originator adalimumab: nationwide observational study emulating a randomised clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

In 2018, a nationwide mandatory switch from originator to biosimilar adalimumab was conducted in Denmark. The available biosimilar was GP2017 (Hyrimoz) in Eastern regions and SB5 (Imraldi) in Western regions. We aimed to assess the comparative effectiveness of GP2017 versus SB5 in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA)/psoriatic arthritis (PsA)/axial spondyloarthritis (AxSpA).

METHODS

Observational cohort study based on the DANBIO registry with geographical cluster pseudo-randomisation, analysed by emulating a randomised clinical trial. Main outcome was adjusted 1-year treatment retention (Cox regression). Furthermore, 6 months' remission rates (logistic regression), reasons for withdrawal and back-switching to originator were investigated (overall and stratified by indication).

RESULTS

Overall, of 1570 eligible patients, 1318 switched and were included (467 RA/321 PsA/530 AxSpA); 623 (47%) switched to GP2017, 695 (53%) to SB5. Baseline characteristics of the two clusters were largely similar, but some differences in registration practice were observed. The combined 1-year retention rate for the two biosimilars was 89.5%. Compared with SB5, estimated risk of withdrawal for GP2017 was lower (HR 0.60; 95% CI 0.42 to 0.86) and 6 months' remission rate was higher (OR 1.72; 95% CI 1.25 to 2.37). Stratified analyses gave similar results (statistically significant for RA). During 1 year, 8.5% and 12.9% withdrew GP2017 and SB5, respectively (primarily lack of effect and adverse events), of whom 48 patients (3.6%) back-switched.

CONCLUSION

This head-to-head comparison of GP2017 versus SB5 following a mandatory switch from the originator indicated differences in effectiveness in routine care. This may reflect a true difference, but other explanations, for example, differences in excipients, differences between clusters and residual confounding cannot be ruled out.

SPOSAB ABP 501: A Sicilian Prospective Observational Study of Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease Treated with Adalimumab Biosimilar ABP 501

BACKGROUND AND AIM

There are few clinical data on Adalimumab (ADA) biosimilars in inflammatory bowel disease. We aimed to perform a multicenter, observational, prospective study on safety and effectiveness of ADA biosimilar ABP 501 in patients with inflammatory bowel disease.

METHODS

All consecutive patients from the cohort of the Sicilian Network for Inflammatory Bowel Disease treated with ADA biosimilar ABP 501 from February 2019 to February 2020 were enrolled. Patients were divided into three groups: group A, naïve to ADA and naïve to anti-tumor necrosis factors; group B, naïve to ADA and previously exposed to anti-tumor necrosis factors; and group C: switched from ADA originator to ABP 501.

RESULTS

A total of 559 patients (median age 39 years; Crohn's disease 88.0%, ulcerative colitis 12.0%) were included, with a follow-up time of 403.4 patient-years. Thirty-six serious adverse events occurred in 36 patients (6.4%; incidence rate [IR]: 8.9 per 100 person-years [PY]). The IR of serious adverse events was higher among patients in group A compared with group C (17.4 vs 4.8 per 100 PY; IR ratio = 3.61; P < 0.001) and among patients in group B compared with group C (16.4 vs 4.8 per 100 PY; IR ratio = 3.42; P = 0.041). Among ADA-naïve patients (group A + B), 188 (85.8%) had a clinical response after 12 weeks, including 165 (75.3%) who achieved steroid-free remission. Higher treatment persistence estimates were reported for patients in group C compared with groups A and B (log-rank P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Safety and effectiveness of ABP 501 seem to be overall similar to those reported for ADA originator. Switching from originator to ABP 501 was safe and effective.

Switching from Biosimilar to Biosimilar Adalimumab, Including Multiple Switching, in Crohn's Disease: A Prospective Study

No data are available regarding the safety and effectiveness of the biosimilar-to-biosimilar switch of adalimumab in any disease, and in particular in Crohn's disease (CD). The aim of our study was to provide real world data on switching from biosimilar adalimumab to another biosimilar, including multiple switching. We conducted a prospective, single-centre observational study in which we consecutively recruited all CD patients who switched from adalimumab biosimilar ABP 501 to biosimilar SB5 from January to July 2021. Sixty-one patients were included in the final analysis, of whom 43/61 (70.5%) were multiple switches (Humira® → ABP 501 → SB5). After 6 months of follow up, 88.5% (54/61) of patients maintained SB5 on therapy. The success of the switch (defined as no systemic corticosteroids within 6 months, non-discontinuation of SB5, no dose escalation) was achieved by 82.0% (50/61) of patients. At multivariate analysis, C-reactive protein > 5 mg/L predicted switch failure (p = 0.03). Seven patients (11.5%) experienced side effects, compared to one patient (1.6%) in the 6 pre-switch months (p = 0.03). In conclusion, switching from biosimilar to biosimilar of adalimumab did not lead to signs of safety or loss of efficacy other than those already known in the literature for the class of drugs.

A propensity score-weighted comparison between adalimumab originator and its biosimilars, ABP501 and SB5, in inflammatory bowel disease: a multicenter Italian study

BACKGROUND

Adalimumab is an effective and safe biological drug for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Nowadays, several biosimilar agents are available, but data regarding their efficacy and safety in patients with IBD are still lacking. We aimed to compare the effectiveness and tolerability between adalimumab originator, ABP501 and SB5 biosimilars in patients with IBD in the short term (after induction and after 6 months of treatment) through a propensity score-weighted multicenter cohort study.

METHODS

We included 156 patients with IBD, 69 patients with ulcerative colitis and 87 patients with Crohn's disease (CD) receiving ABP501 or SB5 biosimilars from January 2019 to April 2020 for moderate-to-severe disease. For comparison, a group of age- and sex-matched patients treated with adalimumab originator was used. We collected clinical and biochemical data after induction and at 6 months of treatment. Endoscopic data were recorded only at baseline.

RESULTS

Overall, clinical benefit was achieved by 86.4% and 85.3% after induction and at 6 months, respectively, without a statistically significant difference between the three treatment groups (p = 0.68 and p = 0.46). However, after induction, we found significant differences between the two types of the disease (ulcerative colitis or CD, p = 0.004), with a greater clinical benefit achieved by patients with CD. Also, the therapeutic optimization rate between the three drugs was not statistically significant different (p = 0.30). All treatments showed a good safety profile, with only 10 patients who needed to stop therapy because of adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Adalimumab biosimilars seem to be as effective and safe as the originator in patients with IBD. Surely, they represent a great opportunity to reduce the costs of biological therapies, however larger and longer real-life studies are necessary.

Adalimumab biosimilars, ABP501 and SB5, are equally effective and safe as adalimumab originator

To date, data on effectiveness and safety of Adalimumab (ADA) biosimilars in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) are lacking. Therefore, we aimed to verify the ability of ABP501 and SB5 to maintain the clinical and biochemical response induced by the ADA originator, after switching to them. We prospectively analyzed data collected from 55 patients with IBD who switched to ABP501, and 25 patients with IBD who switched to SB5, from ADA originator at four IBD Units between 2018 and 2020. In addition, we included an age and sex-matched control group (n = 38) who continued ADA originator for at least two years and who did not switch to a biosimilar drug. Clinical and biochemical data (C-Reactive Protein (CRP), fecal calprotectin (FC)), concomitant steroid and/or immunosuppressant therapy at the time of the switch and after six months were collected. At six months, in the ABP501 group, we did not observe statistically significant modifications in clinical activity of disease (p = 0.09) and FC values (p = 0.90)_. Some patients (n = 8) needed to add steroids at six months after switching (p = 0.01), however the need for optimization was not significant between the two timepoints (p = 0.70). Finally, 14.5% patients stopped therapy after six months. Similarly, in the SB5 group we observed a stability of clinical activity and FC values (p = 0.90 and p = 0.20), and a concomitant statistically significant decrease in CRP (p = 0.03). There were no differences in steroids/immunosuppressants need or optimizing biological therapy in this group. Finally, drug survival curves of patients who switched from originator to ABP501 and those who continued ADA originator were similar (p = 0.20). Overall, biosimilar drugs seem to be as effective and safe as the originator. Further larger and longer studies are mandatory to understand the clinical implications of these findings.

ABP 501 (adalimumab-atto) in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease: an example of evidence-based extrapolation

We report the available evidence demonstrating the biosimilarity of ABP 501 (AMGEVITA®, adalimumab-atto) to its reference product (RP) (Humira®, adalimumab), and the rationale for the extrapolation of the results obtained with the RP in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) to ABP 501. Based on its preclinical and clinical data, ABP 501 has been authorized for use in Europe in all the indications approved for the RP, including Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis.

Effectiveness and safety of switching to adalimumab biosimilar ABP 501 in Crohn's disease: the extrapolation concept

We sincerely thank Viscido et al. for their appropriate and sharable comments on our recent study on adalimumab biosimilar ABP 501 in Crohn's disease (CD). The use of a biosimilar in inflammatory disorders is one of the current main topics, given the great opportunity to save resources that can be invested in innovative drugs and the ethical problems that non-medical switching can generate.

Effectiveness and safety of switching to adalimumab biosimilar ABP 501 in Crohn's disease

We read with great interest the article "Effectiveness and safety of adalimumab biosimilar ABP 501 in Crohn's disease: an observational study" by Ribaldone et al., which was recently published in your journal. The authors report the first real-life study of the adalimumab biosimilar ABP 501 in Crohn's disease (CD). The study investigated the short-term effectiveness and safety of ABP 501 in 87 patients with CD, 25 patients naïve to adalimumab and 62 switched from the adalimumab originator. A meaningful proportion of CD patients treated with ABP 501 showed clinical benefit with a satisfactory safety profile until the end of follow-up.