Comparative pharmacokinetics of an adalimumab biosimilar SB5 administered via autoinjector or prefilled syringe in healthy subjects

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

BACKGROUND

This study compared the pharmacokinetics (PK), immunogenicity, and safety of candidate tocilizumab biosimilar, CT-P47, administered via auto-injector (CT-P47 AI) or pre-filled syringe (CT-P47 PFS), in healthy Asian adults.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

In this phase I, multicenter, open-label study, participants were randomized 1:1 to receive a single 162 mg/0.9 mL dose of CT-P47 via AI or PFS. Primary endpoints were area under the concentration - time curve from time zero to infinity (AUC0-inf) and maximum serum concentration (Cmax). PK equivalence was determined if 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for the ratios of geometric least-squares means (gLSMs) were within the predefined 80-125% equivalence margin. Secondary PK parameters, immunogenicity, and safety outcomes were also assessed.

RESULTS

Of 314 participants randomized (155 CT-P47 AI; 159 CT-P47 PFS), 310 received the study drug (153 CT-P47 AI; 157 CT-P47 PFS). Primary and secondary PK results, immunogenicity and safety were similar between groups. Ninety percent CIs for the ratio of gLSMs were within the predefined equivalence margin for AUC0-inf (85.87-102.94) and Cmax (82.98-98.16).

CONCLUSIONS

PK equivalence between CT-P47 AI and CT-P47 PFS was demonstrated in healthy Asian adults, with comparable immunogenicity and safety between the two devices.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05617183.

Review of Adalimumab Biosimilar SB5 in Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases

SB5 is an approved biosimilar of adalimumab, a recombinant monoclonal anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antibody. The approval of SB5 was based on the comparison with reference adalimumab in analytical studies, pharmacokinetic (PK) and immunogenicity assessments, and randomized controlled trials. Efficacy data was primarily obtained in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, and extended to include additional indications such as psoriasis, Crohn's disease, or ulcerative colitis by extrapolation. Following its approval, additional post-marketing data have been collected comparing SB5 with reference adalimumab. This review summarizes the clinical data on SB5 from randomized controlled trials and provides a comprehensive overview of the available post-approval data. In "real-world" settings, SB5 was as effective as its reference product across different indications and countries, treatment persistence was well maintained throughout studies, and no new safety concerns were identified. In both controlled and "real-world" settings, switching from reference adalimumab to SB5 was not associated with altered efficacy or clinical complications. In post-approval studies, the quality of SB5 was consistent over time, independent of the batch and process changes, and the SB5 autoinjector was preferred over other autoinjectors by both healthcare professionals and patients. Taken together, these data support the use of SB5 whenever reference adalimumab is appropriate and demonstrate that switching from reference adalimumab to SB5 is feasible.

Healthcare Professional (HCP) and Patient Usability Evaluation and Preferences of Two Auto-injector Devices for Self-Injection of Biosimilars, SB4 and SB5: A Literature Review

BACKGROUND

Numerous biologic drugs, including etanercept and adalimumab, are administered subcutaneously. This study reviewed the evidence on the usability and preference of self-injection devices of SB4 and SB5 compared with the reference product injectors.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in PubMed using the search string "(Imraldi OR Hadlima OR SB5 OR Benepali OR Brenzys OR SB4) AND (preference) AND (device)" covering the period from 28 January 2016 (first introduction of SB4) to 31 May 2022. Only articles and abstracts on usability or preference-rating of SB4 and SB5 autoinjectors (AI) written in English were selected. Additional papers identified via manual search supplemented the retrieved papers.

RESULTS

A total of nine articles and one conference poster were selected (seven surveys, one observational study, and two phase II studies). Overall, participants of the studies included nurses and rheumatologists, as well as patients who were from three medical specialties where these medicines are most commonly used (rheumatology, gastroenterology, and dermatology). The majority of patients and healthcare professionals rated ease of use and ease of grip as the most important device attributes. SB4/Pen and SB5/Pen were mostly preferred over their prefilled syringes (PFS), Enbrel/Pen, and Humira/Pen.

CONCLUSION

The analyzed data on usability and device preference indicate that SB4/Pen and SB5/Pen were preferred over the other reference product autoinjectors, thanks to their button-free design, auditory and visual injection feedback, and overall ease of use. Therefore, they were preferred over the other reference product autoinjectors. Because user-friendly devices can improve treatment adherence, pharmaceutical companies should consider patient convenience when developing medical devices.

A multicenter, randomized, open-label, 2-arm parallel study to compare the pharmacokinetics, safety and tolerability of AVT02 administered subcutaneously via prefilled syringe or autoinjector in healthy adults

BACKGROUND

AVT02 is an adalimumab biosimilar, with bioequivalence previously established along with clinical similarity. This study assessed the pharmacokinetic (PK) similarity of a single dose of 100 mg/mL AVT02 administered via prefilled syringe (PFS) or autoinjector (AI).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

In this open-label, 2-arm, parallel-group study, healthy adults were randomized 1:1 to receive one 40 mg (100 mg/mL) dose of AVT02 subcutaneously via PFS (N = 102) or AI (N = 105). Primary PK parameters (Cmax, AUC0-t and AUC0-inf) were evaluated up to Day 64 of the study. Secondary PK parameters, safety, tolerability and immunogenicity were also assessed.

RESULTS

The 90% CIs for the ratio of geometric least squares means were contained within the pre-specified 80-125% equivalence margins for the primary PK parameters, demonstrating bioequivalence of AVT02 when administered by PFS or AI. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was comparable between the two groups, with a low frequency of injection site reactions observed. Immunogenicity profiles were also similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Bioequivalence was demonstrated for a single dose of AVT02 administered via PFS or AI. These results will help to increase availability of devices for patients, enabling treatment choice and flexibility.

Comparison of Efficacy and Safety of Original and Biosimilar Adalimumab in Active Rheumatoid Arthritis in a Real-World National Cohort

Background and Objectives: Real-world evidence should reflect the evidence obtained from controlled trials; therefore, the study aimed to compare biosimilar adalimumab (bADA) to original adalimumab (oADA) in terms of efficacy and safety in a real-life national cohort of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients. Materials and Methods: The following study is a prospective observational study in which we analyzed patients treated with reimbursed biologics from the Romanian Registry of Rheumatic Diseases (RRBR). RA cases must fulfill the 2010 classification criteria, as well as specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. The RRBR database was queried for all RA patients starting oADA or bADA (FKB327, GP2017, MSB11022, SB5 available) from 2 May 2019 (the first bADA initiation) until 26 March 2022 (study search date). Results: The study included 441 patients who started oADA (48.3%) or bADA (51.7%) in the same time period. At baseline, patients starting bADA had a significantly higher mean age and lower prevalence of women. After the first six months of treatment, there were no significant differences between the oADA and bADA regarding rates of Boolean (15.0% vs. 12.3%, p = 0.401), DAS28-CRP (32.4% vs. 34.2%, p = 0.686) and SDAI (16.4% vs. 14.0%, p = 0.483) remission rates. There were 107 cases of adverse events (AE): 81.3% on oADA and 18.7% on bADA. Notably, 51.4% of AE were infections. Regarding severity, 49.5% of AEs were mild, 34.6% were moderate, and 15.9% were severe. Conclusion: Biosimilar adalimumab showed similar efficacy and safety to original adalimumab after the first six months of treatment in RA patients from a national registry.

A review of bridging clinical studies between different presentations of biological products approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration (US FDA)

INTRODUCTION

There is growing interest in the development of multiple presentations for biological products for subcutaneous (SC) injection for life cycle management and product differentiation. Bridging clinical studies are required to extrapolate the existing data package to new presentations.

AREAS COVERED

This review compiles information of bridging clinical studies conducted for biological products administered by the SC route and approved in more than one presentation by the United States Food and Drug Administration's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research up until 31 December 2021. Information regarding indication(s), presentation(s), approval pathways, approval timelines, and various aspects of bridging clinical studies was collected from published documents.

EXPERT OPINION

The type of bridging clinical study can depend on the extent of differences between presentations, existing data packages, and the stage of the product development. Design of a bridging clinical study should be based on the characteristics of a biological product and should be aimed at detecting the relevant differences between presentations. Single-dose comparative pharmacokinetics in normal healthy volunteers is the most common bridging clinical study design. Covariates like body weight and injection site should be considered during the design of these studies. The impact of the different user interfaces of presentations should also be considered.

A Randomized Pharmacokinetic Study in Healthy Male Subjects Comparing a High-concentration, Citrate-free SB5 Formulation (40 mg/0.4 ml) and Prior SB5 (Adalimumab Biosimilar)

Introduction

SB5 is an approved biosimilar of adalimumab, a monoclonal anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) antibody. This study compared pharmacokinetics (PK), safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity between a new high-concentration, low-volume, and citrate-free formulation (40 mg/0.4 ml, SB5-HC) and the current low-concentration formulation with higher volume (40 mg/0.8 ml, SB5-LC) to evaluate the bioequivalence of the two formulations.

Methods

This study was a randomized, single-blind, two-arm, parallel-group, single-dose study in healthy male subjects. Subjects were randomized to receive either SB5-HC or SB5-LC via subcutaneous injection using a pre-filled syringe. Primary endpoints were the area under the curve of the concentration–time curve from zero to infinity (AUC_inf) and maximum serum concentration (C_max). Bioequivalence was achieved if the 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for the ratios of the geometric least squares mean (LSMean) of primary endpoints were within the pre-defined bioequivalence margins of 0.80–1.25. Secondary endpoints included safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity.

Results

Subjects (n = 188) were randomized to SB5-HC (n = 94) or SB5-LC (n = 94). Baseline characteristics were comparable between the two treatment groups. The mean values for AUC_inf and C_max were similar between the SB5-HC and SB5-LC groups. For the primary endpoints, the geometric LSMean ratios (90% CI) for AUC_inf and C_max were 0.920 (0.8262–1.0239) and 0.984 (0.9126–1.0604), respectively, placing the corresponding 90% CIs well within the pre-defined bioequivalence margin of 0.80–1.25. All treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were considered mild to moderate and were reported for 44.7% and 51.1% of subjects in the SB5-HC and SB5-LC groups, respectively. Immunogenicity assessed by frequency of occurrence of anti-drug antibodies (ADAs) and neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) was comparable between groups.

Conclusions

This bridging study demonstrated PK equivalence and comparable safety and tolerability of subcutaneous injection of SB5 via SB5-HC or SB5-LC.

Clinicaltrials.gov identifier

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04514796.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40744-022-00471-8.

An update on the adalimumab biosimilar landscape following the approval of the first high-concentration biosimilar

Biosimilars can reduce healthcare costs and expand patient access to biologic therapies. Currently, eight adalimumab biosimilars have received regulatory approval from the EMA and/or the US FDA. Following recent EMA approval of the first high-concentration adalimumab biosimilar, CT-P17, this review provides a contemporary update on adalimumab biosimilars currently licensed in Europe and the USA. The totality of evidence from each clinical development program is summarized, and characteristics of each formulation and/or device that potentially affect the convenience of treatment for patients are discussed. Future perspectives are considered, including the potential impact of the FDA's first interchangeability designation for an adalimumab biosimilar, ahead of their entry into the US marketplace in 2023.

Randomised, phase I pharmacokinetic study of adalimumab biosimilar CT-P17 (40 mg/0.4 mL) by autoinjector and prefilled syringe in healthy subjects

AIMS

To evaluate pharmacokinetic equivalence and preliminary safety of the adalimumab biosimilar CT-P17 administered via autoinjector (CT-P17 AI) or prefilled syringe (CT-P17 PFS) in healthy subjects.

METHODS

This phase I, open-label study (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04295356) randomised subjects (1:1) to receive a single 40-mg (100 mg/mL) dose of CT-P17 AI or CT-P17 PFS. Primary endpoint was pharmacokinetic equivalence of CT-P17 AI to CT-P17 PFS for: area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity (AUC0-inf ); area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to the last quantifiable concentration (AUC0-last ); maximum serum concentration (Cmax ). Equivalence was determined if the 90% confidence interval for the geometric least-squares mean ratio was within the 80-125% equivalence margin. Additional pharmacokinetic endpoints, safety and immunogenicity were evaluated.

RESULTS

Of 193 subjects who were randomised (98 CT-P17 AI; 95 CT-P17 PFS), 180 received study drug. Pharmacokinetic equivalence was demonstrated: 90% confidence intervals were within the 80-125% equivalence margin (AUC0-inf : 93.98-114.29; AUC0-last : 91.09-121.86; Cmax : 94.08-111.90). Mean serum CT-P17 concentrations, secondary pharmacokinetic parameters and numbers of subjects with antidrug antibodies (ADAs) or neutralising ADAs were comparable between groups. AUC0-inf , AUC0-last and Cmax were numerically lower for ADA-positive than for ADA-negative subjects (both groups); pharmacokinetic equivalence was also demonstrated among ADA-positive subjects. CT-P17 AI and CT-P17 PFS were well tolerated, with comparable overall safety profiles.

CONCLUSIONS

CT-P17 AI and CT-P17 PFS were pharmacokinetically equivalent. Overall safety and immunogenicity were comparable between the 2 delivery devices.

Comparable Pharmacokinetics, Safety, and Tolerability of Etrolizumab Administered by Prefilled Syringe or Autoinjector in a Randomized Trial in Healthy Volunteers

Introduction

Etrolizumab is a novel, dual-action anti-β7 integrin antibody studied in phase 3 trials in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. An autoinjector (AI) is being developed in parallel to complement the prefilled syringe with needle safety device (PFS-NSD) for subcutaneous (SC) administration in these trials. Here we demonstrate the comparable pharmacokinetics, tolerability, and safety of both devices.

Methods

This randomized, open-label, two-part study in healthy participants evaluated the comparability of etrolizumab exposure between the AI and the PFS-NSD. Part 1 (pilot) involved a small number of participants, and initial results were used to finalize the design of the larger part 2 (pivotal) study. In both parts, participants were randomly assigned to receive a single SC dose of etrolizumab 105 mg by AI or PFS-NSD. Randomization was stratified by body weight. Primary pharmacokinetic outcomes were C_max, AUC_last, and AUC_0–inf.

Results

One hundred and eighty healthy participants (part 1, n = 30; part 2, n = 150) received a single SC dose of etrolizumab by AI or PFS-NSD. Primary pharmacokinetic results from part 1 supported modification of the part 2 study design. Results from part 2 demonstrated that etrolizumab exposure was equivalent between devices, with geometric mean ratios (GMRs) between AI and PFS-NSD of 102% (90% confidence interval [CI] 94.2–111) for C_max, 98.0% (90% CI 89.3–107) for AUC_last, and 97.6% (90% CI 88.6–107) for AUC_0–inf. Median t_max and mean terminal t_1/2 were also similar between devices. GMRs and 90% CIs of all primary pharmacokinetic parameters were fully contained within the predefined equivalence limits (80–125%).

Conclusion

This pharmacokinetic study demonstrated that single SC injections of etrolizumab 105 mg using an AI or a PFS-NSD resulted in equivalent etrolizumab exposure and similar safety and tolerability in healthy participants. Taken together, these results support the use of an AI for etrolizumab administration.

Trial Registration

NCT02996019.

Randomized, Open-Label, Single-Dose, Parallel-Group Pharmacokinetic Study of PF-06410293 (adalimumab-afzb), an Adalimumab Biosimilar, by Subcutaneous Dosing Using a Prefilled Syringe or a Prefilled Pen in Healthy Subjects

This open-label, single-dose, randomized, parallel-group, 2-arm phase 1 bioequivalence (BE) study assessed the pharmacokinetics (PK), safety, and tolerability of PF-06410293 (ADL-PF), an adalimumab (ADL) biosimilar, following administration by prefilled pen (PFP) or prefilled syringe (PFS). A total of 164 healthy adult subjects were randomized (1:1) to receive ADL-PF (40 mg subcutaneously) in the lower abdomen or upper anterior thigh by PFS or PFP; 163 subjects were included in the primary PK analysis. The concentration-time profiles of the ADL-PF PFS and PFP treatment arms were similar. The 90% confidence intervals for the test/reference ratios of the primary end points (area under the serum concentration-time profile from time 0 to 2 weeks after dosing and maximum observed serum concentration) fell within the 80.00%-125.00% prespecified margin for BE. Comparable numbers of subjects experienced adverse events (AEs) between treatment groups, and injection-site pain was similar at all times and for the 2 injection-site locations. This study demonstrated the BE of ADL-PF following subcutaneous administration using either a PFS or PFP device. ADL-PF by PFS or PFP injection was well tolerated, with the distribution of AEs, including injection-site reactions, being similar between treatment arms.

Safety and tolerability of a humanized rabbit monoclonal antibody (SSS07) in healthy adults: Randomized double-blind placebo-controlled single ascending dose trial

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

SSS07, a humanized rabbit monoclonal antibody, can selectively block human tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α). The objective of this study was to assess the safety, tolerability, and relative immunogenicity of SSS07 after multiple single subcutaneous (SC) doses in healthy volunteers.

METHODS

A total of 71 healthy volunteers were randomized to six sequential ascending-dose groups (5, 15, 30, 50, 75, and 100 mg), and except for the 100 mg group that only had one subject who received a placebo, all of the other groups included two placebo-control subjects. Safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity were assessed by physical examinations, vital signs, electrocardiography (ECG), clinical laboratory tests, and plasma anti-drug antibody (ADA) over 28 days for each group. Their concentrations of TNF-α were also analyzed. Only after safety and tolerance were determined in the lower-dose groups was the next dose group initiated. The dose increments did not exceed 100 mg.

RESULTS

No serious adverse events or dose-limited toxicity (DLT) were observed, so 100 mg was defined as the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). Overall, 71 AEs and 59 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were reported in 36 (60.0%) and 30 (50.0%) volunteers, respectively, who received SSS07. All AEs and TRAEs were mild or moderate and expected based on previous results with similar types of drugs, without new safety concerns. Except for infections and administration site reactions, the frequency and intensity of the other TRAEs were similar for SSS07 and placebo. No severe acute immune reactions occurred. The lower dose's immunogenicity was stronger than the higher doses. The highest ADA titer was observed 3 to 6 months after administration.

CONCLUSION

SSS07 was generally safe and well tolerated in healthy Chinese volunteers. Higher immunogenicity was observed at low SSS07 concentration levels. The infections and administration site conditions might have been related to the immunogenicity and the degree of inhibition of TNF-α. However, the existence of ADA did not appear to affect the safety of the subjects throughout the follow-up period. These findings could support further investigations of treatments with humanized monoclonal antibodies.

Prefilled pen versus prefilled syringe: a pilot study evaluating two different methods of methotrexate subcutaneous injection in patients with JIA

BACKGROUND

Methotrexate is the most commonly used disease-modifying antirheumatic drug recommended in the treatment of juvenile idiopathic arthritis. It can be administered orally or subcutaneously, the latter method is associated with fewer side effects and higher drug bioavailability. Nevertheless, the pain associated with injection is a considerable drawback of this treatment option in the pediatric population. Currently, there are two single-use subcutaneous injection devices available: the prefilled syringe and the prefilled pen. This prospective, two-sequence crossover study aimed to compare ease of use, frequency of therapy side effects, injection-site pain and parent/patient preference of those methotrexate parenteral delivery systems.

METHODS

Twenty-three patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis, already treated with subcutaneous methotrexate in the form of prefilled syringe in the period October 2018 - April 2019 completed a questionnaire evaluating their experience with this device. Subsequently, children received a one-month supply of pen autoinjector and completed the same questionnaire, regarding their experience with the new methotrexate delivery system. If the patient was not performing the injections himself the questionnaires were completed by the caregiver administrating MTX. The results obtained in both questionnaires were compared using the Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank test.

RESULTS

82,6% patients and their caregivers voted for the prefilled pen as their preferred method of subcutaneous methotrexate administration. Moreover, the injection with the prefilled pen was reported as less painful in comparison to the prefilled syringe (p < 0.01). Side effects of methotrexate were less pronounced after the prefilled pen treatment, this difference was most prominent regarding gastrointestinal adverse events associated with the injection (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Administration of methotrexate using the pen device is a promising way of subcutaneous methotrexate delivery in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis, as the injection is less painful and associated with fewer side effects.

A Randomized, Double-Blind, Parallel-Group, Phase 1 Clinical Trial Comparing the Pharmacokinetic, Safety, and Immunogenicity of the Biosimilar HS016 and the Originator Adalimumab in Chinese Healthy Male Subjects

A comparison of the immunogenicity, safety, and pharmacokinetic properties of HS016 and its originator, adalimumab, was conducted in Chinese healthy male subjects. This was a phase 1 single‐center, randomized, parallel‐group double‐blind clinical trial. Chinese healthy male subjects (1:1) allocated to HS016 and adalimumab groups were treated with single subcutaneous injections (40 mg/0.8 mL). The pharmacokinetic equivalence of HS016 and adalimumab was assessed by (1) the area under the plasma concentration‐time curve (AUC) from time 0 to the last detectable drug concentration (AUC_0‐t), (2) the AUC from time 0 extrapolated to infinity (AUC_0‐∞), and (3) the maximum plasma concentration (C_max). Other pharmacokinetic parameters (time to C_max, apparent clearance, and half‐life), safety, and immunogenicity were also evaluated. A total of 136 subjects were randomly divided into HS016 (n = 68) or adalimumab (n = 68) groups. The geometric means of AUC_0‐t, AUC_0‐∞, and C_max were similar for HS016 and adalimumab. The 90%CIs of AUC_0‐t (87.2% to 106.1%), AUC_0‐∞ (87.4% to 108.4%), and C_max (98.6% to 113.6%) were all within the prespecified bioequivalence criteria (80% to 125%). The incidence of treatment‐emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was similar in both groups, with most TEAEs being mild; only 3 (4.4%) subjects in the HS016 group experienced moderate TEAEs. No significant differences in the time to C_max, apparent clearance, half‐life, and immunogenicity were detected. The pharmacokinetic profile of HS016 was equivalent to that of the originator, adalimumab, with similar safety and immunogenicity profiles. HS016 may be considered for assessment in the treatment of patients with ankylosing spondylitis.