The evolution of biosimilars in oncology, with a focus on trastuzumab

Expanding access to biotherapeutics in low-income and middle-income countries through public health non-exclusive voluntary intellectual property licensing: considerations, requirements, and opportunities

Biotherapeutics, such as recombinant proteins and monoclonal antibodies, have become mainstays of modern medicine as shown by their increasing number in the WHO Model List of Essential Medicines. However, despite frequently offering clinical advantages over standards of care, they remain largely out of reach for populations in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs), partly because of high costs. Accordingly, the WHO Model List of Essential Medicines Expert Committee has requested that the Medicines Patent Pool explore intellectual property licensing to address this challenge. We therefore investigated how licensing could successfully improve affordability of and timely access to biotherapeutics in LMICs, by leveraging expert consultations, literature analysis, and internal technical knowledge. The key elements identified as relevant to support access to affordable biosimilars in LMICs through licensing include: prioritising potential biotherapeutic targets according to their potential for public health impact; supporting biosimilar product and clinical development (including through technology transfer to expedite regulatory approval); and facilitating biosimilars' entry and use in LMICs (by meeting procurement, supply chain, and health system requirements).

Machine learning modeling to identify affinity improved biobetter anticancer drug trastuzumab and the insight of molecular recognition of trastuzumab towards its antigen HER2

In the present study, a machine learning (ML) model was developed to predict the epistatic phenomena of combination mutants to improve the anticancer antibody-drug trastuzumab's binding affinity towards its antigen human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2). An ML algorithm, Support Vector Regression (SVR) was used to develop ML models with a data set consists of 193 affinity values of single mutants of trastuzumab and its associated various amino acid sequence derived descriptors. The subset selection of descriptors and SVR hyperparameters were done using the Genetic Algorithm (GA) within the SVR and the wrapper approach called GA-SVR. A 100 evolutionary cycles of GA produced the best 100 probable GA-SVR models based on their fitness score (Q2) estimated using a stratified 5 fold cross-validation procedure. The final ML model found to be highly predictive of test data set of six combination mutants and one single mutant with Rpre2 = 0.71. The analysis of descriptors in the ML model highlighted the importance of mutant induced secondary structural variation causes the binding affinity variation of the trastuzumab. The same was verified using a short 20 ns and a long 100 ns in duplicate molecular dynamics simulation of a wild and mutant variant of trastuzumab. The secondary structure induced affinity change due to mutations in the CDR-H3 is a novel insight that came out of this study. That should help rational mutant selection to develop a biobetter trastuzumab with a multifold improved binding affinity into the market quickly.Communicated by Ramaswamy H. Sarma.

Effectiveness and Safety of Zercepac and Reference Trastuzumab in the Neoadjuvant Setting for Early-Stage Breast Cancer: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Aim

Since the high cost of reference trastuzumab limits its clinical application, this study aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of the Zercepac and reference product trastuzumab in neoadjuvant therapy for HER2-positive breast cancer.

Methods

This study retrospectively collected clinical data of patients with early-stageHER2-positive breast cancer, who received trastuzumab, pertuzumab, docetaxel, and platinum as neoadjuvant therapy from November 2020 to July 2021. Patients were divided into the Zercepac and reference trastuzumab groups. Reduction in tumor size, clinical response based on RECIST1.1 criteria, pathological complete response (pCR), and adverse events (AEs) were evaluated. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to adjust confounders.

Results

A total of 105 patients were included in the study, among them, 65 were in the Zercepac group and 40 were in the reference trastuzumab group. The percentage of tumor shrinkage from baseline was comparable between the Zercepac and reference trastuzumab group (47.6 ± 18.6% vs. 43.0 ± 19.9%, p = 0.235). Clinical partial response rate was similar between the two groups (81.5% vs. 70.0%, p = 0.172). There were 28 cases of pCR (70.0%) in the reference trastuzumab group and 46 cases of pCR (70.8%) in the Zercepac group (p = 0.933). The choice of Zercepac or reference trastuzumab was not significantly associated with pCR (OR = 0.96, 95%CI: 0.41-2.28, p = 0.933). Adverse events (AEs) were observed in all patients, and the incidence of ≥3 grade AEs was comparable between the two groups (81.5% vs. 70.0%, p = 0.172).

Conclusion

Zercepac has similar effectiveness and safety profile compared with reference trastuzumab in neoadjuvant therapy, which provides treatment options for patients with HER2-positive breast cancer.

Oncology biosimilars: New developments and future directions

Biologicals have become an integral part of cancer treatment both as therapeutic agents and as supportive care agents. It is important to know that biologics are large, complex molecular entities requiring extensive immunogenicity testing and pharmacovigilance strategies to ensure no immune response is evoked in the body. Oncology's pharmacological market is dominated by biologics; however, their high development and manufacturing costs are burdensome to health care systems. Biologics being the most expensive prescription drugs on the market limit the accessibility for necessary treatment in the case of many patients. As biologics patents expire, the development of biosimilars is underway in an effort to lower costs and enable patients to access new cancer therapies. Regulatory guidelines for biosimilars have now been established and are constantly being revised to address any issues, facilitating their robust development. Moreover, many scientific societies offer guidance to help stakeholders better understand current regulations and biosimilar's safety. Despite the potential cost benefits, lack of knowledge about biosimilars, and the possibility of immunogenicity have created an uncertain environment for healthcare professionals and patients. In this review, we provide an overview of relevant legislation and regulations, pharmacoeconomics, and stakeholder perceptions regarding biosimilars. The article also describes biosimilars in development, as well as the ones currently available on the market.

Identification of Barriers Preventing Biosimiliar Oncology Medication Adoption

(1) Background: A biosimilar is a biologic medical product that has been approved by the United States Food and Federal Drug Administration (FDA) and is an almost identical copy of an original biologic product yet manufactured by a different company. Biosimilars are often assumed to be the same as generic medications, while often made from living organisms. Through clinical trials, biosimilars have been shown to be both as safe and as effective as their originator products. Biosimilars have also proven they can reduce the costs to both insurance companies and patients in many circumstances. However, despite their cost savings, biosimilar manufacturers continue to face barriers in having oncologists and cancer centers prescribe them for their patients. This review aims to identify barriers associated with medical provider prescriptive behaviors related to biosimilars for patients. (2) Methods: Reviewers analyzed 27 articles and identified common themes. (3) Results: After a thorough literature review, the researchers identified seven barriers to prescribing of biosimilars: physician comfort in originators instead of biosimilars, patient reluctance to switch from a current biologic to a biosimilar, provider profits associated with an originator biologic, lack of stakeholder education on biosimilars, lack of provider team knowledge of biosimilars, lack of knowledge surrounding the biosimilar FDA approval process, and hesitancy to stock multiple drugs for a specific indication. (4) Conclusions: This review's findings of identified barriers to use of biosimilars provides insight for healthcare providers and organizations surrounding prescribing practices and potential treatment benefits for cancer patients who may benefit from biosimilar treatment medications.

Systematic Review on the Use of Biosimilars of Trastuzumab in HER2+ Breast Cancer

Trastuzumab is a monoclonal antibody used in the treatment of breast cancer in cases where the tumor overexpresses the HER2 receptor, a cell membrane receptor activated by the epidermal growth factor. Intravenous and subcutaneous administration of trastuzumab have comparable clinical and pharmacological characteristics, but trastuzumab biosimilars are currently only available in intravenous form. Trastuzumab biosimilars are ultimately preferred by a proportion of patients, especially in cases where co-administration of other chemotherapeutic agents, such as trastuzumab and tucatinib, a small molecule of tyrosine kinase inhibitor, is required in patients with HER-positive metastatic breast cancer. Oncologists should be well-aware of the advantages of intravenously administered trastuzumab biosimilars over subcutaneous administration, certainly also taking into account the patient's preferences. Further cost-effectiveness analyses will be very important, along with expectations regarding successful concomitant subcutaneous administration of trastuzumab with other anticancer drugs, such as pertuzumab. This systematic review describes and analyzes the so-far published studies concerning the use of the available trastuzumab biosimilars in HER-positive early and metastatic breast cancer in terms of efficacy, safety, and cost-benefit ratio. An attempt was also made to draw some conclusions and to comment on future needs and perspectives.

Trastuzumab in breast cancer treatment: the Era of biosimilars

BACKGROUND

The discovery of trastuzumab as anti-HER2 therapy markedly improved disease control and the survival rates of patients with HER2+ breast cancer. However, as trastuzumab is considered a complex molecule, the cost of production is usually elevated, which significantly affects health budgets and limits the treatment access for patients who live in underdeveloped countries. Recently, trastuzumab production became more accessible and sustainable due to the patents' expiration, allowing biosimilar versions of trastuzumab to be developed.

OBJECTIVE

Our main goal was to shed more light on the uses of biosimilars in breast cancer treatment, emphasizing trastuzumab.

METHOD

An integrative review was carried out in the PubMed, Scielo, Web of Science, and SCOPUS databases using the terms "biosimilar," "breast cancer," "monoclonal antibody," and "trastuzumab." The time range included scientific articles published from 2015 to 2021.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The bibliographic survey showed the complexities in biological medicine manufacturing and how the monoclonal antibody's therapy with trastuzumab improved the patients' life expectancy, revolutionizing HER2+ breast cancer treatment. Nonetheless, despite its benefits, trastuzumab generates certain restrictions, especially from the economic perspective. Trastuzumab biosimilars have high selectivity and rarely cause adverse effects compared to conventional chemotherapy.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that trastuzumab biosimilars improve patients' accessibility to breast cancer treatment through a safe and effective therapy compared to the drug reference.

Final overall survival analysis of the phase 3 HERITAGE study demonstrates equivalence of trastuzumab-dkst to trastuzumab in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer

Purpose

The phase 3 HERITAGE trial demonstrated that the biosimilar trastuzumab-dkst is well tolerated with similar efficacy (measured by overall response rate [ORR] and progression-free survival [PFS]) compared with originator trastuzumab combined with taxane followed by monotherapy in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Herein, we present final overall survival (OS) from HERITAGE.

Methods

HERITAGE is a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group study. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive trastuzumab-dkst or trastuzumab plus taxane followed by continued monotherapy until disease progression. Overall survival was to be assessed at 36 months or after 240 deaths, whichever occurred first, as observed from time of randomization of last patient.

Results

At the final analysis (36 months), 242 patients in the intention-to-treat population had died during the study: 116 and 124 in the trastuzumab-dkst and trastuzumab groups, respectively, and 1 untreated patient from each treatment group. Median OS by Kaplan–Meier analysis was 35.0 months with trastuzumab-dkst and 30.2 months with trastuzumab. Evaluation of PFS showed a median of 11.1 months in both treatment groups. No new safety concerns were reported from week 48 until the end of the survival follow-up.

Conclusion

This is the first phase 3 trial of a trastuzumab biosimilar to report long-term survival data similar to originator trastuzumab in patients with MBC. The comparable long-term OS between the trastuzumab-dkst and originator trastuzumab groups further supports the similarity of trastuzumab-dkst with originator trastuzumab and establishes trastuzumab-dkst as a safe and effective treatment option for patients with HER2-positive MBC.

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02472964; 6/16/2015

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10549-021-06197-5.

Biosimilars accessible in the market for the treatment of cancer

Biosimilars are the biological product clinically identical to a biologic reference standard regarding their strength, purity, and safety. A large segment of biosimilars has been developed for the treatment of cancer. This review aims to discuss various facets of biosimilars and explicates on biosimilars accessible in the market for cancer clinical intervention. It also illustrates the outcomes of recent clinical trial studies concerning biosimilars. Further, it also crosstalk the safety profiles, regulatory approval requirements, and allied challenges therein. The work will be of significant interest to researchers working in the field of biologics and biosimilars.

Dose equivalency and efficacy of biosimilar erythropoietin stimulating agents: Data from real clinical practice

Recently, biosimilar erythropoietin stimulating agents become available in Kazakhstan. Important properties of the biosimilar such as dose equivalency to the original medicine (originator) and the ability to maintain hemoglobin target levels remain insufficiently described in many clinical settings. Thus, the current study aims to determine dose equivalency and hemoglobin target levels in a cohort of dialysis patients who were switched from the originator to biosimilar. Retrospective data of 74 patients from different dialysis centers who received at least 6 months of originator and switched to biosimilar and had at least 6 months follow‐up were analyzed. The clinical data of 32 male and 42 female patients were collected. The mean age was 52.5 ± 13.5 years. There is no significant difference in mean levels of hemoglobin during pre‐switching from originator to biosimilar (6 months prior) and post switching period (9 months after). Additionally, a subgroup analysis of 59 patients who received originator (epoetin beta), 6 months before the switch, showed similar level of hemoglobin (110.7 ± 14 vs 113.2 ± 10 g/L, P = .05) 6 months after the switch to biosimilar (epoetin zeta) at the equivalent dose regimen (69.5 ± 29 vs 68.1 ± 30 IU/kg/wk, P = .55). However, after 9 months of switching, patients using lower doses of biosimilar (69.5 ± 29 vs 63.3 ± 30 IU/kg/wk, P < .01), showed significantly higher levels of hemoglobin (110.7 ± 14 vs 114.7 ± 8 g/L, P = .01) compared to preswitching period. In conclusion, long‐term use of lower doses of biosimilar managed to maintain hemoglobin within the target levels.

Intravenous and subcutaneous formulations of trastuzumab, and trastuzumab biosimilars: implications for clinical practice

Trastuzumab is a biologic therapy indicated for the treatment of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer and metastatic gastric cancer. Trastuzumab was originally approved as an intravenous (IV) formulation but has since been developed for subcutaneous (SC) administration for patients with HER2-positive breast cancer. Both formulations demonstrate generally comparable pharmacological and clinical profiles. Therefore, when deciding between treatment options, factors such as the route of administration, patient preference, value and cost must be considered. Studies comparing IV with SC trastuzumab indicate that each formulation offers unique advantages to patients depending on their individual needs. Concurrent with the development of SC trastuzumab, IV trastuzumab biosimilars comprise another treatment option that, in view of their reduced cost, might improve patient access and increase cost-effectiveness for healthcare providers and payers. In this review, we seek to raise awareness of the current options available for trastuzumab so that healthcare providers can optimally treat patients according to their individual situations and preferences.

Randomized double-blind clinical trial comparing safety and efficacy of the biosimilar BCD-022 with reference trastuzumab

Background

BCD-022 is a trastuzumab biosimilar which was shown to be equivalent to reference trastuzumab in a wide panel of physicochemical studies as well as preclinical studies in vitro and in vivo. International multicenter phase III clinical trial was conducted to comparatively assess efficacy and safety of BCD-022 and reference trastuzumab in combination with paclitaxel used as the therapy of metastatic HER2(+) breast cancer. Pharmacokinetics and immunogenicity were also studied.

Methods

Patients with no previous treatment for metastatic HER2(+) breast cancer were randomly assigned 1:1 to BCD-022 or reference trastuzumab and were treated with trastuzumab + paclitaxel. Therapy continued for 6 cycles of therapy (every 3 weeks), until progression of the disease or unbearable toxicity. Primary study endpoint was overall response rate. Study goal was to prove equivalent efficacy of BCD-022 and reference trastuzumab. Equivalence margins for 95% CI for difference in overall response rates were set at [− 20%; 20%].

Results

In total 225 patients were enrolled into the study, 115 in BCD-022 arm and 110 in reference trastuzumab arm. Overall response rate was 49.6% in BCD-022 arm and 43.6% in reference trastuzumab arm. Limits of 95% CI for difference of overall response rates between arms were [(− 8.05)-19.89%], thus, they lied within predetermined equivalence margins [− 20%; 20%]. Profile of adverse events was similar between groups (any AEs were reported in 93.81% of patients in BCD-022 arm and 94.55% of patients in reference arm). No unexpected adverse reactions were reported throughout the study. No statistically significant differences regarding antibody occurrence rate (either BAb or NAb) was found between BCD-022 (n = 3; 2.65%) and comparator (n = 4; 3.64%). Both drug products are characterized with low occurrence rate and short life of anti-trastuzumab antibodies. Pharmacokinetics assessment after 1st and 6th study drug injection also demonstrated equivalent PK parameters by all outcome measures: AUC_0–504, С_mах, Т_max, T_1/2. Analysis of C_trough did not reveal any significant inter-group differences as well.

Conclusions

Thus, results of this study have demonstrated therapeutic equivalence of trastuzumab biosimilar BCD-022 and referent trastuzumab drug.

Trial registration

The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (Study Number NCT01764022). The date of registration was January 9, 2013.

Biologic Drug Quality Assurance to Optimize HER2 + Breast Cancer Treatment: Insights from Development of the Trastuzumab Biosimilar SB3

SB3 is a biosimilar of trastuzumab that has been approved for use in the treatment of human epidermal growth factor 2-positive breast cancer and human epidermal growth factor 2-positive gastric cancer. Antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity is one of several critical quality attributes of trastuzumab. Data from the development of SB3 support the hypothesis of a relationship between antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity activity and clinical outcomes in terms of the response rate and long-term survival. Current analytic methods utilizing advanced technology allow the detection of small changes in other quality attributes that influence antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity, such as glycosylation and FcγRIIIa binding. Use of such methods to monitor batch-to-batch consistency enables production of trastuzumab biosimilars with consistent quality. Trastuzumab biosimilars such as SB3 therefore have the potential to increase accessibility to trastuzumab-based therapy without compromising efficacy or safety.

Biological Characterization of SB3, a Trastuzumab Biosimilar, and the Influence of Changes in Reference Product Characteristics on the Similarity Assessment

Background

SB3 has been developed as a trastuzumab biosimilar, a therapeutic monoclonal antibody targeted to human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), and approved by the European Commission and United States (US) Food and Drug Administration (FDA). During the developmental period of a biosimilar, setting an appropriate quality target is critical for assessing the similarity of the biosimilar product to the reference product. A stepwise approach should be taken to assessing similarity, beginning with extensive characterization of the reference product to establish the quality target.

Objective

In this study, we evaluated the similarity of SB3 to the reference product and the impact of changes in the biological profile of the reference product on similarity assessment.

Methods

Analytical similarity was assessed with defined test procedures in terms of critical quality attributes (CQAs) that could affect efficacy, potency, and safety, as well as for the non-CQAs that are related to process consistency. The quality target was established using up to 154 lots of European Union (EU)- and US-sourced Herceptin^® (reference product), analyzed during the developmental period of SB3.

Results

Trends of the EU- and US-sourced reference product showed that the biological profile exhibited two marked changes for Fc-related attributes, and then recovered to pre-change quality level. Since the similarity range set by pre-change lots was considered most relevant, the changed lots were excluded from establishing the similarity range, which resulted in tightened acceptance criteria. As shown in the results of similarity assessment using the stringent quality target ranges, SB3 exhibits highly similar functional activities compared to the reference product in terms of both CQAs and non-CQAs.

Conclusion

SB3 has been developed as a trastuzumab biosimilar approved in the EU and USA, and its manufacturing process is deemed to be robust and well-controlled within stringent quality target ranges.

Emerging Role of Biosimilars in Oncology-Hematology in Saudi Arabia: A Practical Perspective

Biologics are significant drivers of globally escalating healthcare costs. Biosimilars have potential to offer cost savings with comparable efficacy and safety to innovator products and increase the access of treatment to more patients. This study aimed to increase understanding and perception of biosimilars concept. It also described the pharmacoeconomic impact of biosimilar in oncology and formulary consideration of oncology biosimilars substituting with their originators in major oncology centers in the Saudi Arabia. A biosimilar is a biological product that is similar to a reference biopharmaceutical product. As the manufacturing process hinders the ability to identically replicate the structure of the original product, biosimilar cannot be described as an absolute equivalent of the original medication. Different regulatory agencies such as United States Food and Drug Administration, European Medicines Agency, and Saudi Food and Drug Authority have approved several biosimilars of oncology biologics. The experience of biosimilar use in Europe and USA provides valuable insights into the use of biosimilars. The widespread use of biosimilars has the potential to reduce healthcare expenditure, as well as improving access without compromising patient outcomes. There is a need for increasing awareness about biosimilars to improve acceptance rates. The use of biosimilar filgrastim in Ministry of National Guard Health Affairs, Saudi Arabia, has resulted in a significant cost saving annually. It was proposed that further substitution and switching to biosimilars in oncology would lead to major savings in resources.

Variability of Biologics and its Impact on Biosimilar Development

This symposium took place during the International Conference on Malignant Lymphoma (ICML) in Lugano, Switzerland, June 2019, and focussed on scientific aspects associated with development and approval of rituximab biosimilars in lymphoma. The symposium began with an overview presented by Dr Cornes detailing the urgent economic need for biosimilars to improve access to these biologic treatments in oncology and other therapy areas. Prof Schellekens, author of the first paper on biosimilars in 2002, discussed how regulatory strategies for biosimilars were shaped, and how these have evolved in the intervening years. Today, the emphasis of biosimilar development is placed on extensive analytical testing to demonstrate a match with the reference medicine at a fundamental level. Clinical testing plays a confirmatory role, removing any residual uncertainty regarding potential clinical differences between biosimilar and reference medicine. Dr Schiestl presented further detail on analytical perspectives on biosimilars. Development of biosimilars is complicated by the inherent variability of biological synthesis techniques employed in the manufacture of biologics. This variability is further increased by ongoing changes to manufacturing processes, which can result in changes in biological activity. Consistent quality is therefore a cornerstone of biosimilar development. Prof Jurczak provided a comprehensive overview of the factors that must be considered during clinical development of a biosimilar. Clinical trials for biosimilars have a confirmatory role in the development process, rather than the pivotal role played by clinical trials for reference medicines. Therefore, these trials have markedly different objectives compared with reference clinical trials, resulting in differences in the chosen endpoints. In biosimilar trials, response endpoints, which provide rapid and sensitive assessments of equivalence, are preferred to survival endpoints, which require large and lengthy trials for adequate evaluation. Prof Jurczak illustrated this using data from the Phase III clinical trials of the Sandoz rituximab biosimilar. In this trial, Sandoz rituximab demonstrated an equivalent response rate to reference rituximab. Increasing economic pressure on healthcare systems means that biosimilars are likely to play an increasing role in the treatment of cancer in coming years, requiring clinicians to increase their familiarity with these important medicines.

The Breakthrough of Biosimilars: A Twist in the Narrative of Biological Therapy

The coming wave of patent expiries of first generation commercialized biotherapeutical drugs has seen the global market open its doors to close copies of these products. These near perfect substitutes, which are termed as “biosimilars”, do not need to undergo intense clinical trials for their approval. However, they are mandated to produce identical similarity from their reference biologics in terms of clinical safety and efficacy. As such, these biosimilar products promise to foster unprecedented access to a wide range of life-saving biologics. However, seeing this promise be fulfilled requires the development of biosimilars to be augmented with product trust, predictable regulatory frameworks, and sustainable policies. It is vital for healthcare and marketing professionals to understand the critical challenges surrounding biosimilar use and implement informed clinical and commercial decisions. A proper framework of pharmacovigilance, education, and scientific exchange for biologics and biosimilars would ensure a dramatic rise in healthcare access and market sustainability. This paper seeks to collate and review all relevant published intelligence of the health and business potential of biosimilars. In doing so, it provides a visualization of the essential steps that are required to be taken for global biosimilar acceptance.

Efficacy and Safety of Anti-cancer Biosimilars Compared to Reference Biologics in Oncology: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Many biosimilars of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are becoming increasingly available as anticancer therapies, such as the rituximab, bevacizumab, and trastuzumab biosimilars. However, no comprehensive summary of their efficacy and safety is available.

OBJECTIVE

This study synthesized current evidence on the efficacy and safety of mAb biosimilars relative to their reference biologics among cancer patients.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane library, ClinicalTrials.gov, the ISI Web of Science, and several Chinese databases from their inception dates to December 31, 2018, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or comparative observational studies that compared the efficacy and safety of biosimilars with reference biologics used in oncology. The binary outcomes were pooled using risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), continuous outcomes using weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% CIs, and time-to-event outcomes using hazard ratios (HRs). Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were conducted following this. We used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach to rate the quality of the evidence.

RESULTS

We did not find any comparative observational studies that fit the criteria. Twenty-three RCTs were identified for biosimilars of three mAbs, of which eight RCTs examined rituximab biosimilars (total N = 1534), six RCTs were for bevacizumab biosimilars (total N = 1897), and nine were for trastuzumab biosimilars (total N = 4953), respectively. The quality of the GRADE evidence for efficacy and safety outcomes was moderate or low. The findings were robust for all pre-specified subgroup and sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSION

The existing evidence suggests highly comparable efficacy and safety profiles between mAb biosimilars and their reference biologics in oncological drugs.

Biosimilar Trastuzumab in Clinical Trials: Differences or Not?

In the last decade, cancer therapies have increasingly taken the form of combination treatments in which biologic agents play a crucial role. In breast cancer, the treatment strategy is adjusted to intrinsic subtypes such as human epidermal growth factor receptor-2(HER2)-positive. With the introduction of trastuzumab, a monoclonal antibody against HER2, survival has significantly improved in early and metastatic breast cancer. Trastuzumab's patent has now expired and biosimilars are moving into the market. Several clinical trials have led to the approval of 5 different biosimilar trastuzumabs. Results proved similarity between the proposed biosimilar and the reference product without significant differences in efficacy and safety, although follow-up has been short. However, the shorter drug development process with its goal of showing similarity rather than patient benefit uses surrogate endpoints such as pathologic complete response and overall response rate, not survival endpoints in terms of the 'gold standarD' in evaluating cancer therapies. The aim of this article is to give insight into how to plan and perform a clinical trial to prove equivalence between a biosimilar trastuzumab and its reference product and to elucidate the setup and outcome of published clinical trials.

Access to high-cost drugs for advanced breast cancer in Latin America, particularly trastuzumab

Provision of high-level healthcare is a challenge for all low- to middle-income countries (LMICs) since healthcare systems are heterogeneous, face many challenges such as inadequate funding, inequitable distribution of resources and services and usually are not adequately equipped to deal with a huge problem such as breast cancer. The development of anti-HER2 therapies can be considered one of the most important examples of the translation of molecular biology knowledge into clinical benefits for cancer patients. While a variety of novel therapeutic strategies are emerging, current treatment regimens remain focussed on targeted therapy with monoclonal antibodies, mainly trastuzumab, the first agent developed in this field. While these results have revolutionised the outcome of HER2+ patients in clinical trials and in high-income countries where they are widely available, results have not impacted the natural history of this aggressive disease in most of the world. Unfortunately, the availability of these drugs is far from universal in many LMICs, and in Latin America, in particular, patients with HER2+ breast cancer are treated exclusively with standard chemotherapy, a more toxic and less efficient therapy. While the complexity of the situation and the multiple factors that have an impact in this scenario are recognised, we need to map the future and develop feasible strategies to address possible solutions to the problem of drug access. A clear and unbiased diagnosis of the situation is a good starting point. Defining healthcare priorities and a clear strategy for the allocation of resources is difficult but mandatory. In this article, we will discuss current and future challenges regarding access (and lack of access) to high-cost cancer drugs in Latin America, with a focus on anti-HER2 therapies.

Biosimilar medicines used for cancer therapy in Europe: a review

This article provides an updated review of the biosimilar medicines approved for cancer therapy in the European Union (EU). First we discuss the most relevant aspects for the development and approval of biosimilar medicines. We then present the oncological biosimilar drugs currently used, which include epoetins (alpha and zeta), filgrastim, and monoclonal antibodies (rituximab, trastuzumab and bevacizumab). Among the clinical applications of biosimilar medicines, cancer therapy remains the main target area and more approved biosimilars are expected over the next few years, providing cost-effective drugs to more patients. Furthermore, comprehensive pharmacovigilance studies are going on, monitoring the marketed biosimilars, and providing more feasible information to clinicians regarding the safety and efficacy of these medications.