Biosimilars in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Facts and Fears of Extrapolation

Use of Biosimilars: A Systematic Review of Published Position Statements and Recommendations from Health Organisations and Societies

BACKGROUND

Hesitation about using biosimilars still exists among healthcare professionals (HCPs), despite extensive experience with their use. Globally, several health organisations and societies from various specialties have issued biosimilar position statements to guide the use of biosimilars in their specialties. However, it is uncertain how similar or different their positions or recommendations are or whether these positions have evolved with the increased experience and availability of new evidence.

OBJECTIVES

The study aimed to describe and assess the recommendations of published position statements regarding several aspects of biosimilars across specialties and determine whether these positions have changed with the emergence of new evidence.

METHODS

We systematically searched for published position statements of biosimilars in online databases and included statements written in English. The search was from the inception of the databases until May 2023. Two reviewers independently extracted the data. Only position statements that included recommendations to guide the use of biosimilars in clinical practice and were issued by health organisations and societies, including expert panels, were included. We synthesised recommendations on five aspects: prescribing practice, extrapolation of indication, interchangeability, treatment initiation with biosimilars in biologic-naïve patients, and pharmacovigilance.

RESULTS

The review included 25 papers involving eight specialties, 16 of which were from European countries, 1 from an international organisation representing 49 countries, and 6 from various countries. The papers were published between 2009 and 2020, with 19 published between 2015 and 2020. Of the five aspects of biosimilars assessed, nearly half (11 of 25) of the papers at the time they were published did not base their positions on a scientific or evidence-based approach. Only 4 of the 25 position papers were identified as revisions of their previous papers. With increasing experience in biosimilars and the emergence of new evidence, about 60% (16 of 25) of the papers contained outdated recommendations, particularly on two aspects. They were extrapolations of indications and interchangeability (including switching). The recommendations for most papers for three other aspects were still appropriate. These were prescribing biosimilars by their brand name and active ingredient, initiating treatment with biosimilars in biologic-naïve patients, and monitoring the long-term safety of biosimilars through pharmacovigilance. For four of the revised papers, their position evolved from opposing indication extrapolation for biosimilars to accepting it, while the position of two papers shifted from not recommending biosimilar switching to permitting the practice. Meanwhile, most papers were against automatic substitution by pharmacists because the evidence for this practice was still limited.

CONCLUSIONS

Across specialties, the variability among the position statements is seen for extrapolation of indications for biosimilars and interchangeability (including switching). This requires a revision, considering the latest evidence and growing experience with the use of biosimilars in extrapolated indications and with switching.

Clinical use of biologics for Crohn's disease in adults: lessons learned from real-world studies

INTRODUCTION

The therapeutic armamentarium for managing Crohn's disease (CD) has expanded significantly in recent decades. Several biologics with three different mechanisms of action [anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, anti-integrin α4β7, and anti-IL 12/23] are currently available to manage CD.

AREA COVERED

This narrative review aims to summarize the most significant efficacy and safety data on the use of infliximab (IFX), adalimumab (ADA), vedolizumab (VDZ) and ustekinumab (UST) for the treatment of CD obtained from studies conducted in the real world (RW), compared to the results of randomized clinical trials (RCTs).

EXPERT OPINION

RW studies reported that biologic agents included in this analysis have higher remission rates and lower adverse event rates than findings from RCTs for treating patients with CD. All biological agents have proven effective and safe in RW studies, even when using biosimilars or switching to subcutaneous administration of the molecules for which they are available. Finally, anti-TNF-α agents, particularly IFX, have a higher rate of adverse events (AEs) than VDZ and UST. Therefore, patients at higher risk of AEs may benefit from other biologics than anti-TNF-α. However, further long-term RW studies are needed to confirm these findings.

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

Background and aims

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Biosimilars in Pediatric IBD: Updated Considerations for Disease Management

Biologic drugs have significantly modified the pharmacological management of several chronic conditions, including inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). By contrast, in the last two decades, biologics have been associated with increased direct medical costs. As patents for the reference drugs have expired, the development and commercialization of biosimilars through abbreviated licensing pathways represented an affordable alternative in patients fulfilling the indication for biologics. A growing body of evidence, first in adults and then in the pediatric age group too, has provided reassuring data in terms of efficacy and safety of biosimilars both in naïve patients and in those previously on reference drugs who had to switch to the biosimilar. This review summarizes the currently available evidence for biosimilar use in IBD, with a focus on pediatric IBD. The most common practical approaches to biosimilar use in the pediatric clinical settings are also discussed.

Emerging role of biosimilars in the clinical care of inflammatory bowel disease patients

The increasing incidence of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) globally has redirected the healthcare system's focus towards safe and affordable pharmacological interventions. The inception of anti-tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) had resulted in a trend shift from surgical interventions. However, as the patents of approved anti-TNF-α drugs expire, biological copies of the many approved products are in the pipeline. The most commonly used biosimilar for IBD has been infliximab, followed by Adalimumab biosimilars which have been approved in major countries across the world. Although biosimilars are approved on the basis of similarity of their reference product, the lack of real-world evidence of its safety in ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease patients has contributed to physicians’ hesitancy. However, biosimilars are expected to reduce treatment costs and provide economic benefits.

Amino acids in inflammatory bowel diseases: Modern diagnostic tools and methodologies

Amino acids are crucial building blocks of living organisms. Together with their derivatives, they participate in many intracellular processes to act as hormones, neuromodulators, and neurotransmitters. For several decades amino acids have been studied for their potential as markers of various diseases, including inflammatory bowel diseases. Subsequent improvements in sample pretreatment, separation, and detection methods have enabled the specific and very sensitive determination of these molecules in multicomponent matrices-biological fluids and tissues. The information obtained from targeted amino acid analysis (biomarker-based analytical strategy) can be further used for early diagnostics, to monitor the course of the disease or compliance of the patients. This review will provide an insight into current knowledge about inflammatory bowel diseases, the role of proteinogenic amino acids in intestinal inflammation and modern analytical techniques used in its diagnosis and disease activity monitoring. Current advances in the analysis of amino acids focused on sample pretreatment, separation strategy, or detection methods are highlighted, and their potential in clinical laboratories is discussed. In addition, the latest clinical data obtained from the metabolomic profiling of patients suffering from inflammatory bowel diseases are summarized with a focus on proteinogenic amino acids.

A Review of the Totality of Evidence for the Development and Approval of ABP 710 (AVSOLA), an Infliximab Biosimilar

ABP 710 (AVSOLA^®) is a biosimilar to infliximab reference product (RP), a monoclonal antibody targeting tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFα). It is approved in the USA and Canada for all the same indications as infliximab RP. Approval of ABP 710 was based on the totality of evidence (TOE) generated using a stepwise approach to assess its similarity with infliximab RP with regard to analytical (structural and functional) characteristics, pharmacokinetic parameters, and clinical efficacy and safety. ABP 710 was shown to be analytically similar to infliximab RP including in amino acid sequence, primary peptide structure, and glycan mapping and purity. ABP 710 was also demonstrated to be similar to infliximab RP with regard to functional characterization including in vitro binding, effector functions, and signaling pathways important for the mechanisms of action for clinical efficacy in multiple indications of immune-mediated inflammatory disorders including inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), especially binding to both soluble and membrane-bound TNFα. Pharmacokinetic similarity of ABP 710 with infliximab RP was demonstrated in healthy volunteers following a single 5 mg/kg intravenous dose. Comparative clinical efficacy of ABP 710 with infliximab RP was demonstrated in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Safety and immunogenicity were also demonstrated to be similar for both ABP 710 and the RP. Overall, the TOE supported the conclusion that ABP 710 is highly similar to infliximab RP and supported scientific justification for extrapolation to all approved indications of infliximab RP, including IBD.

Current evidence on the use of the adalimumab biosimilar SB5 (ImraldiTM): a multidisciplinary perspective

INTRODUCTION

This review provides an overview of data from trials and real-world studies available for SB5 (Imraldi^TM) across three main therapeutic areas: rheumatology, gastroenterology, and dermatology.

AREAS COVERED

A literature search for publications on data for SB5 efficacy/effectiveness, safety, and immunogenicity was undertaken.

EXPERT OPINION

Evidence derived from clinical studies suggest that the biosimilar SB5 is a safe and effective alternative to reference adalimumab. Considering that patients suffering from immune-mediated inflammatory diseases such as inflammatory arthritis, inflammatory bowel disease and psoriasis often require long-term biologic treatment, biosimilar medicines (such as SB5) can reduce healthcare costs while increasing access to effective treatments.

An observational study of switching infliximab biosimilar: no adverse impact on inflammatory bowel disease control or drug levels with first or second switch

BACKGROUND

Biologics account for a significant cost in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) management; however, switching from infliximab originator to its biosimilars has enabled cost saving without compromising disease control. The effects on IBD activity and infliximab trough levels of a second switch to another biosimilar are, however, uncertain.

AIMS

To assess the effects on disease activity and infliximab trough levels associated with switching from infliximab biosimilar CT-P13 to another biosimilar SB2 and compare outcomes in those switching for the first and second time.

METHODS

IBD patients on CT-P13, including some previously switched from originator, were prospectively followed during a switch to SB2. C-reactive protein (CRP), trough infliximab level and clinical disease activity indices were collected at baseline, Infusion 3 or 4 ('early' after switch), and 1 year.

RESULTS

One hundred eighty-six patients (n = 99 second switch) on stable infliximab dosing underwent switching. Compared with baseline, there was no significant change in CRP, clinical disease activity scores or median trough infliximab level at the early time point among first-switch (baseline vs early: 5.7 vs 6.6 µg/mL, P = 0.05) and second-switch (4.3 vs 4.9 µg/mL, P = 0.07) patients nor at 1 year (median infliximab trough levels, baseline vs 1 year, in first-switch [5.7 vs 5.7 µg/mL, P = 0.37] and second-switch [4.3 vs 4.7 µg/mL, P = 0.06] patients). The proportion of patients in clinical remission did not significantly change at the early (92% vs 91% at baseline, P = 0.75) or 1 year (95% vs 91% at baseline, P = 0.16) time points. There was no significant difference in time to loss of response between patients switching for the first or second time (P = 0.69).

CONCLUSIONS

Switching from one infliximab biosimilar to another had no adverse impact on infliximab trough levels, and clinical and biochemical disease activity, regardless of whether switching for the first or second time.

Biosimilars in chronic inflammatory diseases: facts and remaining questions 5 years after their introduction in Europe

INTRODUCTION

Five years after the launch of the first infliximab biosimilar, biologics have found their place in the treatment of chronic inflammatory conditions, but there are remaining questions. This is a review of the introduction of antibody biosimilars in Europe; the reasons for their success and how biosimilar hesitancy was quailed.

AREAS COVERED

We provide an overview of the concepts of biosimilarity, extrapolation, and interchangeability, using examples in rheumatology and gastroenterology for illustration. A review of the evidence collected from switching studies using robust designs is included. Remaining questions such as 'inter-switching' are also discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

Biosimilars have democratized access to powerful medicines. Efficacy and safety studies provided reassuring data, but knowledge gaps persist. The availability of so-called 'bio-betters' might open new avenues and change clinical practice.

Biosimilar Interchangeability and Emerging Treatment Strategies for Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: A Commentary

This commentary summarizes a collection of key references published within the last ten years, and identifies pharmacologic research directions to improve treatment access and success through greater biosimilar or “follow-on” biologic utilization combined with other targeted small molecule agents that possess unique pathophysiologic mechanisms for inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) in adult and pediatric patients. Since they are not identical to the originator or reference biologic agent, all biosimilars are not generically equivalent. However, in the US and other countries, they are considered therapeutically interchangeable if the manufacturer has demonstrated no clinically meaningful differences from the reference product. Comparisons of different clinical initiation and switching scenarios are discussed with reference to interchangeability, immunogenicity, nocebo effect, cost effectiveness, and time courses for discontinuation rates.

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

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

Post-Marketing Pooled Safety Analysis for CT-P13 Treatment of Patients with Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases in Observational Cohort Studies

Background

At EU marketing authorisation, safety data for CT-P13 (biosimilar infliximab) were limited, particularly in some indications, and uncommon adverse events (AEs) could not be evaluated among relatively small analysis populations.

Objectives

Our objective was to investigate the overall safety profile and incidence rate of AEs of special interest (AESIs), including serious infections and tuberculosis, in CT-P13-treated patients.

Methods

Data were pooled from six observational studies representing authorised indications of CT-P13 (ankylosing spondylitis, rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, plaque psoriasis, adult and paediatric Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis). Patients were analysed by indication and treatment (patients who received CT-P13 or those who switched from reference infliximab to CT-P13 ≤ 6 months prior to enrolment or during the study).

Results

Overall, 4393 patients were included (n = 3677 CT-P13 group; n = 716 switched group); 64.03% of patients had inflammatory bowel disease and 6.31% of patients were antidrug antibody positive. Overall, 32.94% and 9.58% of patients experienced treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) and treatment-emergent serious AEs, respectively. Across indications, TEAEs were more frequent with CT-P13 than with the switched group. Infections including tuberculosis were the most frequent serious AESI overall (2.48%) and by treatment group or indication. In total, 14 patients (0.32%) reported active tuberculosis. Overall incidence rates per 100 patient-years (95% confidence interval) were 3.40 (2.788–4.096) for serious infections including tuberculosis and 0.44 (0.238–0.732) for active tuberculosis. Infusion-related reactions were the second most frequent AESI following infection including tuberculosis.

Conclusion

The CT-P13 safety profile appears consistent with previous studies for CT-P13 and reference infliximab, supporting the favourable risk/benefit balance for CT-P13 treatment.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s40259-020-00421-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Comparison of original and biosimilar infliximab (CTP-13) in biologic-naïve patients with Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis: a retrospective, multicenter real-life study in Spain

PURPOSE

biosimilar infliximab (CTP-13) has been recently approved for the treatment of several immune-mediated inflammatory disorders, including inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Comparative studies between this biosimilar and original infliximab in the real clinical practice are scarce. The objective of this study was to compare short and long-term safety and efficacy of original (O) and biosimilar infliximab (B-IFX) in biologic-naïve, IBD patients in the real life clinical practice.

METHODS

a retrospective, multicentric study was performed in five Spanish hospitals. Consecutive IBD, biologic-naïve patients from an historic cohort who initiated O-IFX from January 2013 were compared with biologic-naïve patients, who started treatment with B-IFX since its approval in January 2015. The evaluation of efficacy was assessed after the induction phase, at week 14 and week 54 of treatment. Time to dose escalation or treatment persistence of both O-IFX and B-IFX was also considered. The appearance of serious adverse events was recorded.

RESULTS

two hundred and thirty-nine IBD biologic-naïve patients who started with O-IFX or B-IFX were included: 153 patients were diagnosed with Crohn's disease (95 treated with O- and 58 treated with B-IFX) and 86 with ulcerative colitis (40 received O- and 46 received B-IFX). At weeks 14 and 54, both O-IFX and B-IFX groups reached a similar clinical response and remission rates. Time to dose escalation, treatment persistence and safety profile were comparable between both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

this long-term real-life experience provides additional evidence of the similarity of O- and B-IFX CTP-13 in terms of efficacy and safety in IBD patients.

Loss of response and frequency of adverse events in patients with ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease when switching from the original infliximab to its biosimilars

Aim. To define the frequency of adverse events and loss of the response in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohns disease (CD), treated with original medicine infliximab (IFX) Remicaide and its biosimilars. Materials and methods. We included 154 patients with IBD: 78 UC patients (50.6%) и 76 CD patients (49.4%), treated with original medicine IFX Remicade and its biosimilars. In our study we did not include patients, who previously underwent induction treatment with IFX and its biosimilar. Results. Among 78 UC patients, IFX was cancelled in 25 (32.0%) patients and they were switched to the other anti-TNF inhibitor or medicine with the another mechanism of action; in patients group, treated with biosimilar 16 (20.5%) and 9 (11.5%) patients, who were interchanged biosimilar and/or original IFX. Among 76 CD patients IFX was cancelled in 20 (26.3%) patients: 11 (14.5%) patients in group, treated with similar trade name biosimilar, 8 (10.5%) patients, who were interchanged biosimilar and/or original IFX and 1 patient (1,3%), receiving original IFX. We found no difference in the secondary loss of response and adverse events in patients with CD and UC, switched from original IFX to biosimilar (p=0.6257 and p=0.6635, correspondingly). The frequency of the secondary loss of response or adverse events in patients with UC and CD, switched from original IFX to IFX biosimilar, was similar (p0.05). Conclusion. Approximately 30% of IBD patients, receiving IFX biosimilar, will be switched to the other anti-TNF therapy or medicine with the another mechanism of action because of secondary loss of response or adverse events.

Clinical Practice of Adalimumab and Infliximab Biosimilar Treatment in Adult Patients With Crohn's Disease

The introduction of tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors has significantly changed the treatment landscape in Crohn's disease (CD). The overall therapeutic achievements with TNF inhibitors such as infliximab, adalimumab, and certolizumab pegol paved the way to push the boundaries of treatment goals beyond symptomatic relief and toward cessation of objective signs of inflammation, including endoscopic remission. Even though these agents are widely used for the treatment of moderate to severe CD, heterogeneity still exists in translating evidence-based guidelines on the use of anti-TNF agents into actual treatment algorithms in CD. This might be due to several reasons including disparities in health expenditure policies; lack of harmonization between countries; and variations in assessment of disease severity, use of disease monitoring tools, or application of treatment targets by physicians. With the advent of biosimilars, patent-free versions of reference biologics are now available to minimize health inequalities in drug availability. In this context, this article aims to provide practical clinical guidance for the use of infliximab and adalimumab biosimilars in patients with moderate to severe CD by outlining different clinical scenarios that patients may encounter during their treatment journey.

Efficacy of biosimilar infliximab CT-P13 among inpatients with severe steroid-refractory colitis

INTRODUCTION

In this study, we evaluate the efficacy and safety of the biosimilar infliximab, CT-P13, in the treatment of inpatients with severe steroid-refractory colitis.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of adult colitis patients (UC or isolated Crohn's colitis) admitted to the University of Chicago inflammatory bowel disease inpatient service between January 2018 and December 2018 for management of severe colitis refractory to IV steroids who received CT-P13 were included in the study. Patients diagnosed with active small bowel Crohn's disease were excluded. CT-P13 was given as a single infusion of 5 to 10 mg/kg. A comprehensive review of their electronic medical records was performed, and demographic, clinical, laboratory, and endoscopic data were extracted. The primary endpoint was colectomy-free survival.

RESULTS

Twenty-one patients with severe steroid-resistant colitis were included. Twelve patients had ulcerative colitis, seven patients had a diagnosis of indeterminate colitis, and two patients had a diagnosis of Crohn's colitis. The median age was 32.2 years. The median disease duration was 4.3 years, and the median follow-up time was 5.9 months. Patients had a median CRP of 23. All patients had moderate to severe disease on endoscopy. Colectomy-free survival was 76% at 3 months and 70% at 6 months. No severe adverse events were reported in this patient cohort.

CONCLUSION

A significant proportion of patients with severe colitis failing IV steroids responded to induction therapy with CT-P13. Colectomy-free survival rates were similar to previous randomized trials using originator infliximab as induction therapy in severe steroid-refractory colitis.

Efficacy and Safety of CT-P13 in Inflammatory Bowel Disease after Switching from Originator Infliximab: Exploratory Analyses from the NOR-SWITCH Main and Extension Trials

Background

The NOR-SWITCH main and extension trials demonstrated that switching from originator to biosimilar infliximab (CT-P13) is efficacious and safe across six diseases. However, a subgroup analysis of Crohn’s disease (CD) in the main trial displayed a close to significant difference favouring originator infliximab, and more scientific data have therefore been requested.

Objective

The aim was to assess treatment efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity in an explorative subgroup analysis in CD and ulcerative colitis (UC) in the NOR-SWITCH trials.

Patients and Methods

The 52-week, randomised, non-inferiority, double-blind, multicentre, phase 4 NOR-SWITCH study was followed by a 26-week open extension trial where all patients received treatment with CT-P13. Treatment efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity in CD and UC were assessed throughout the 78-week study period.

Results

The main and extension trials included 155 and 93 patients with CD and 93 and 80 patients with UC, respectively. Demographic and baseline characteristics were comparable in both treatment arms within patient groups. There were no differences in the main and extension trials regarding changes in activity indices, C-reactive protein, faecal calprotectin, patient’s and physician’s global assessment of disease activity and patient-reported outcome measures in CD and UC. Moreover, comparable results were also demonstrated for trough serum levels, presence of anti-drug antibodies, and reported adverse events.

Conclusion

Efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of both the originator and biosimilar infliximab were comparable in CD and UC in the NOR-SWITCH main and extension trials. These explorative subgroup analyses confirm that there are no significant concerns related to switching from originator infliximab to CT-P13 in CD and UC.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02148640.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s40259-020-00438-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Nocebo effect and biosimilars in inflammatory bowel diseases: what's new and what's next?

INTRODUCTION

The use of biosimilars for the treatment of patients with chronic inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) showed to be a valid strategy to reduce the economic burden of biologics on health-care costs and to increase patient access to treatment. However, the nocebo effect constitutes an important limitation to the wide use of biosimilars.

AREAS COVERED

We conducted a literature overview to summarize information on nocebo effect in IBD population and to provide physicians with practical key strategies to prevent the nocebo effect in daily clinical practice and to improve patients' outcomes.

EXPERT OPINION

Despite the proven efficacy and safety of biosimilars, further clinical studies are needed to define the effects of reverse and multiple switches in the management of patients with IBD. The development of new subcutaneous formulations, better accepted by patients, could contribute to reduce patients' negative expectations, and limit the nocebo effect.

An updated review of infliximab biosimilar, CT-P13, in the treatment of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases

The introduction of anti-TNFs, such as infliximab (IFX), has revolutionized the treatment of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. Anti-TNF agents have shown outstanding efficacy and long-term improvement of clinical outcomes, but the cost has been relatively high. Out of this concern, several 'biosimilar' drugs of anti-TNF agents have been developed. CT-P13, the first biosimilar of reference IFX, was approved by the European Medicines Agency and licensed by the US FDA for use in all indications of IFX. This updated review summarizes all aspects of CT-P13, including pharmacology and pharmacokinetics, and evaluates its efficacy, safety and immunogenicity for all indications based on the results of the latest clinical trials as well as on real-world experiences.

Analytical and Functional Similarity Assessment of ABP 710, a Biosimilar to Infliximab Reference Product

Purpose

ABP 710 has been developed as a biosimilar to infliximab reference product (RP). The objective of this study was to assess analytical similarity (structural and functional) between ABP 710 and infliximab RP licensed by the United States Food and Drug Administration (infliximab [US]) and the European Union (infliximab [EU]), using sensitive, state-of-the-art analytical methods capable of detecting minor differences in product quality attributes.

Methods

Comprehensive analytical characterization utilizing orthogonal techniques was performed with 14 to 28 unique lots of ABP 710 or infliximab RP, depending on the assay. Comparisons were used to investigate the primary structure related to amino acid sequence; post-translational modifications (PTMs) including glycans; higher order structure; particles and aggregates; primary biological properties mediated by target and receptor binding; product-related substances and impurities; and general properties.

Results

ABP 710 had the same amino acid sequence, primary structure, higher order structure, PTM profiles and biological activities as infliximab RP. The finished drug product had the same strength (protein content and concentration) as infliximab RP.

Conclusions

Based on the comprehensive analytical similarity assessment, ABP 710 was found to be highly analytically similar to infliximab RP for all biological activities relevant for clinical efficacy and safety.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s11095-020-02816-w) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The Future of Biosimilars: Maximizing Benefits Across Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases

Biologics have transformed the treatment of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Biosimilars-biologic medicines with no clinically meaningful differences in safety or efficacy from licensed originators-can stimulate market competition and have the potential to expand patient access to biologics within the parameters of treatment recommendations. However, maximizing the benefits of biosimilars requires cooperation between multiple stakeholders. Regulators and developers should collaborate to ensure biosimilars reach patients rapidly without compromising stringent quality, safety, or efficacy standards. Pharmacoeconomic evaluations and payer policies should be updated following biosimilar market entry, minimizing the risk of imposing nonmedical barriers to biologic treatment. In RA, disparities between treatment guidelines and national reimbursement criteria could be addressed to ensure more uniform patient access to biologics and enable rheumatologists to effectively implement treat-to-target strategies. In IBD, the cost-effectiveness of biologic treatment earlier in the disease course is likely to improve when biosimilars are incorporated into pharmacoeconomic analyses. Patient understanding of biosimilars is crucial for treatment success and avoiding nocebo effects. Full understanding of biosimilars by physicians and carefully considered communication strategies can help support patients initiating or switching to biosimilars. Developers must operate efficiently to be sustainable, without undermining product quality, the reliability of the supply chain, or pharmacovigilance. Developers should also facilitate information sharing to meet the needs of other stakeholders. Such collaboration will help to ensure a sustainable future for both the biosimilar market and healthcare systems, supporting the availability of effective treatments for patients.

Multifaceted assessment of rituximab biosimilarity: The impact of glycan microheterogeneity on Fc function

Biosimilars are poised to reduce prices and increase patient access to expensive, but highly effective biologic products. However, questions still remain about the degree of similarity and scarcity of information on biosimilar products from outside of the US/EU in the public domain. Thus, as an independent entity, we performed a comparative analysis between the innovator, Rituxan® (manufactured by Genentech/Roche), and a Russian rituximab biosimilar, Acellbia® (manufactured by Biocad). We evaluated biosimilarity of these two products by a variety of state-of-the-art analytical mass spectrometry techniques, including tandem MS mapping, HX-MS, IM-MS, and intact MS. Both were found to be generally similar regarding primary and higher order structure, though differences were identified in terms of glycoform distribution levels of C-terminal Lys, N-terminal pyroGlu, charge variants and soluble aggregates. Notably, we confirmed that the biosimilar had a higher level of afucosylated glycans, resulting in a stronger FcγIIIa binding affinity and increased ADCC activity. Taken together, our work provides a comprehensive comparison of Rituxan® and Acellbia®.

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

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Molecular Landscape of Anti-Drug Antibodies Reveals the Mechanism of the Immune Response Following Treatment With TNFα Antagonists

Drugs formulated from monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are clinically effective in various diseases. Repeated administration of mAbs, however, elicits an immune response in the form of anti-drug-antibodies (ADA), thereby reducing the drug's efficacy. Notwithstanding their importance, the molecular landscape of ADA and the mechanisms involved in their formation are not fully understood. Using a newly developed quantitative bio-immunoassay, we found that ADA concentrations specific to TNFα antagonists can exceed extreme concentrations of 1 mg/ml with a wide range of neutralization capacity. Our data further suggest a preferential use of the λ light chain in a subset of neutralizing ADA. Moreover, we show that administration of TNFα antagonists result in a vaccine-like response whereby ADA formation is governed by the extrafollicular T cell-independent immune response. Our bio-immunoassay coupled with insights on the nature of the immune response can be leveraged to improve mAb immunogenicity assessment and facilitate improvement in therapeutic intervention strategies.

Assays used to assess biosimilarity of therapies for inflammatory bowel disease

Introduction: Biological drugs have revolutionized the treatment of various medical conditions. Recently, upon expiration of patents of a few biological agents, biosimilars are being rapidly developed as an affordable substitute for more expensive biologic drugs, which may serve as a therapeutic alternative for biologics reference medical product (RMP). Prior to approval for use of the biosimilar drug for treatment of RMP indications, a process involving several different assays is required, in which the biosimilar must prove to posses no meaningful differences from an existing approved RMP in terms of purity, safety and potency.Areas covered: This report describes the different assays which are used to assess biosimilar drugs using CT-P13 infliximab biosimilar as a case-in-point. It covers the assays of physicochemical characterization, biological activity, and immunogenicity and examines their rational along with methodological and conceptual caveats clinicians should be cognizant of.Expert opinion: The approval of a biosimilar is a complex process that requires several assays, specifically tailored to the characteristics of the RMP. Determining the required assays and the allowable margin of confidence are of great importance but are not sufficient in order to prove that the biosimilar is indeed not inferior in its clinical potency and safety to the RMP.

SB5 shows cross-immunogenicity to adalimumab but not infliximab: results in patients with inflammatory bowel disease or rheumatoid arthritis

BACKGROUND

The primary objective of this study was to analyze the cross-reactivity of antidrug antibodies to reference adalimumab (ADL) and SB5 (adalimumab biosimilar) in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) or rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

Sera from patients with IBD and RA with or without antibodies to adalimumab (ATA+ or ATA-, respectively) were tested for cross-reactivity with SB5 and ADL. Functional inhibition of tumor necrosis factor-α binding was measured. Sera from patients with antibodies to reference infliximab (ATI+) were examined for cross-reactivity to SB5. Sera were tested by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay.

RESULTS

All 30 anti-ADL ATA+ sera from patients with IBD and all 4 anti-SB5 ATA+ sera from patients with RA were cross-reactive with ADL and SB5 (range of mean concentrations: IBD, 20.99-21.31 μg/ml; RA, 16.46-17.48 μg/ml). In general, there was no significant difference between mean ATA titers. A strong correlation was detected in all ATA+ samples (rho = 0.997 to >0.999; p < 0.001 each). However, ATA- sera were not reactive to either ADL or SB5. anti-ADL ATA+ sera similarly neutralized functional activity of ADL and SB5; no functional inhibition was observed with ATA- sera. ATI+ sera did not cross-react with SB5.

CONCLUSIONS

ADL and SB5 show cross-immunogenicity in sera from patients with IBD or RA, supporting shared immune-dominant epitopes. ATI+ sera did not cross-react with SB5, suggesting different immunogenic epitopes between infliximab and SB5.

Value Assessment and Quantitative Benefit-Risk Modelling of Biosimilar Infliximab for Crohn's Disease

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Regulatory approval of biosimilars often depends on extrapolating evidence from one clinical indication to all of those of the originator biologic. We aimed to develop a quantitative benefit-risk analysis to assess whether the resulting increase in the uncertainty in the clinical performance of biosimilars (i.e. risk) may be countered by their lower pricing (benefit).

METHODS

A 1-year decision-analytic model was developed for the biosimilar infliximab (Inflectra^®) for Crohn's disease. The perspective was that of the National Health Service in the UK and costs were valued to 2015/16. A hypothetical cohort of biologic-naïve patients with moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease was simulated through the model. Immunogenicity to infliximab was a key modifier, influencing rates of non-response and infusion reactions. Net health benefit was estimated based on quality-adjusted life-years. A range of sensitivity analyses tested the robustness of the results and explored how the biosimilar price must respond to varying immunogenicity to remain the preferred option.

RESULTS

The base-case analysis predicted a positive incremental net health benefit of 0.04 (95% central range 0.00-0.09) favouring the biosimilar, based on 0.803 quality-adjusted life-years, and costs of £18,087 and £19,176 for the biosimilar and originator, respectively. Two-way sensitivity analyses suggested that if 50% of patients developed antibodies, the value-based price of £410 per vial must be lower than that of the originator (£420), but remain higher than the actual market price (£378).

CONCLUSIONS

The model supports the use of Inflecta^® for Crohn's disease in the UK, and provides a framework for the quantitative evaluation of biosimilars in the context of a health technology assessment. Value-based pricing using this methodology could protect health systems from the potential risks of biosimilars where they are untested in the approved populations.

The effectiveness and safety of infliximab compared with biosimilar CT-P13, in 3112 patients with ulcerative colitis

BACKGROUND

CT-P13, a biosimilar of the reference product infliximab, has been approved for the treatment of ulcerative colitis on the basis of the results of trials conducted in patients with spondyloarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis.

AIM

To compare the effectiveness and safety of CT-P13 and the reference product in infliximab-naive patients with ulcerative colitis METHODS: A comparative real-life equivalence cohort study was conducted using the French nationwide health administrative database. Infliximab-naive patients with ulcerative colitis over 15 years of age who started infliximab with no other indications for infliximab were included. The primary outcome was a composite endpoint (death, ulcerative colitis-related surgery, all-cause hospitalisation and reimbursement for other biologics). Equivalence was defined as a 95% CI of the hazard ratio (HR) of CT-P13 vs the reference product, in a multivariable marginal Cox model situated within prespecified margins of (0.80-1.25).

RESULTS

A total of 3112 patients were included between 1 January 2015 and 30 June 2017: 1434 received the reference product, 1678 received CT-P13. Overall, 710 patients in the reference product group and 743 patients in the CT-P13 group met the composite endpoint. In multivariable analysis of the primary outcome, CT-P13 was equivalent to the reference product (HR 1.04; 95% CI: 0.94-1.15). The number of serious infections was lower in the CT-P13 group (HR 0.65; 95% CI: 0.48-0.88). There was no difference in the incidence of solid or haematologic malignancy (HR 0.81; 95% CI: 0.41-1.60).

CONCLUSIONS

The effectiveness of CT-P13 is equivalent and the risk of serious infections could be lower than that of the reference product for infliximab-naive patients with ulcerative colitis.

Perception of hematologists and oncologists about the biosimilars: A prospective Tunisian study based on a survey

INTRODUCTION

Biosimilar drugs have significantly shaken the global pharmaceutical market through a better access to the health care services. The aim of this study is to establish a state of play in Tunisia based on the knowledge and perceptions of doctors on biosimilars in order to identify the problems related to these drugs and to propose solutions for improvement.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In our study, we conducted a prospective, descriptive survey using a questionnaire, destinated to oncologists and hematologists with different grades, from both public and private sectors and from several regions. The questions focused on physicians' general knowledge of biosimilars and their comparison with reference on safety, quality, efficacy, and indication. Finally, we explored the proportion of physicians who are favorable to the policy encouraging biosimilar use.

RESULTS

One hundred and seven doctors among 150 answered the questionnaire; 57% were oncologists and 43% were hematologists. About one over five physicians defines biosimilar as a chemical drug. About 29% do not differentiate between a biosimilar and a generic one. A percentage of 68 believe that a biosimilar can have all the indications of its reference following complementary clinical studies. On the other side, 68.2% support the policy encouraging these drugs. Last, only 3.7% of the practitioners believe that they are well informed about biosimilars.

DISCUSSION

Our results are comparable to other surveys described in the literature. However, this is the first study that targets oncologists and hematologists specifically.

CONCLUSION

Our study showed a lack of information from oncologists and hematologists about biosimilars in Tunisia. Thus, health authorities should carry out training programs on biosimilars and introduce clear and effective legislation in order to allow better access to health care services.

Biosimilars for the Management of Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: Economic Considerations

Biological drugs revolutionized the treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) such as Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis. However, not all clinically eligible patients have access to biologicals due to significant costs and budget impact. Biosimilars are highly comparable to their originator product in terms of clinical efficacy and safety. Biosimilars are priced 15-75% lower than their reference product, which makes them a less costly alternative and is expected to offer better patients access to biologicals. The total projected cost savings are significant. If the achieved budget savings were used to cover more biological therapy, several additional IBD patients could be treated. Currently, the main barriers to the increasing uptake of biosimilars are the few incentives of the key stakeholders, while physicians' and patients' skepticism towards biosimilars seems to be changing. Over the coming years, biosimilars are expected to gain a growing importance in the treatment of IBD, contributing to a better access to treatment, improving population-level health gain and sustainability of health systems. This review summarizes the results of the literature on the economic considerations of biosimilars in IBD and the role of biosimilar infliximab in the treatment of IBD.

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

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

Nurses are Critical in Aiding Patients Transitioning to Biosimilars in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Education and Communication Strategies

The increasing prevalence of inflammatory bowel disease and the high costs associated with biologic therapies suggest that biologics with lower costs, but no compromise on efficacy and safety, should be considered when developing a treatment plan for inflammatory bowel disease. Biosimilars offer a more cost-effective alternative, and although the European Medicines Agency has approved the use of biosimilars for many indications, including inflammatory bowel disease, patients may be concerned about the safety and efficacy of these agents. The updated Nurses-European Crohn's and Colitis Organisation statements, published in March 2018, recommend that inflammatory bowel disease nurses facilitate patient choice of biologic or biosimilar therapy. Nurses are pivotal in managing the challenges associated with patients transitioning to biosimilars. However, there is limited information available on how inflammatory bowel disease nurses can communicate the concept of biosimilars to patients and also on how best to support them before and during the switch from originators. This review article will focus on patients' concerns regarding biosimilars and describe considerations for nurses when supporting patients transitioning from originators to biosimilars. Through nurse-led patient education and the use of structured communication strategies, as well as investment in managed switching programmes, patients will become more confident and adherent to their biosimilar therapy, and this may lead to overall reductions in health-care expenditure for inflammatory bowel disease.

Effectiveness and Safety of Reference Infliximab and Biosimilar in Crohn Disease: A French Equivalence Study

BACKGROUND

CT-P13 is a biosimilar of the reference product (RP) infliximab, with demonstrated efficacy and safety for some inflammatory arthritides. It was approved for the treatment of Crohn disease (CD) on that basis, without specific studies examining its effects in CD.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness and safety of CT-P13 and RP in infliximab-naive patients with CD.

DESIGN

Comparative equivalence cohort study.

SETTING

Système National des Données de Santé (SNDS), a French nationwide health administrative database (1 March 2015 to 30 June 2017).

PATIENTS

5050 infliximab-naive patients with CD who were older than 15 years, had started treatment with RP (n = 2551) or CT-P13 (n = 2499), and had no other indications for infliximab.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome was a composite end point of death, CD-related surgery, all-cause hospitalization, and reimbursement of another biologic therapy. Equivalence was defined as a 95% CI of the hazard ratio (HR) of CT-P13 versus RP in a multivariable marginal Cox model situated within prespecified margins (0.80 to 1.25).

RESULTS

Overall, 1147 patients in the RP group and 952 patients in the CT-P13 group met the composite end point (including 838 and 719 hospitalizations, respectively). In multivariable analysis of the primary outcome, CT-P13 was equivalent to RP (HR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.85 to 0.99]). No differences in safety outcomes were observed between the 2 groups: serious infections (HR, 0.82 [CI, 0.61 to 1.11]), tuberculosis (HR, 1.10 [CI, 0.36 to 3.34]), and solid or hematologic cancer (HR, 0.66 [CI, 0.33 to 1.32]).

LIMITATION

The SNDS does not contain all relevant clinical data (for example, disease activity).

CONCLUSION

This analysis of real-world data indicates that the effectiveness of CT-P13 is equivalent to that of RP for infliximab-naive patients with CD. No difference was observed for safety outcomes.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Caisse Nationale de l'Assurance Maladie.

Use of Biosimilars in Pediatric Inflammatory Bowel Disease: An Updated Position Statement of the Pediatric IBD Porto Group of ESPGHAN

Biologic therapies have changed the outcome of both adult and pediatric patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD). In September 2013, the first biosimilar of infliximab was introduced into the pharmaceutical market. In 2015, a first position paper on the use of biosimilars in pediatric IBD was published by the ESPGHAN IBD Porto group. Since then, more data have accumulated for both adults and children demonstrating biosimilars are an effective and safe alternative to the originator. In this updated position statement, we summarize current evidence and provide joint consensus statements regarding the recommended practice of biosimilar use in children with IBD.

The current state of the art for biological therapies and new small molecules in inflammatory bowel disease

The emergence of biologic therapies is arguably the greatest therapeutic advance in the care of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) to date, allowing directed treatments targeted at highly specific molecules shown to play critical roles in disease pathogenesis, with advantages in potency and selectivity. Furthermore, a large number of new biologic and small-molecule therapies in IBD targeting a variety of pathways are at various stages of development that should soon lead to a dramatic expansion in our therapeutic armamentarium. Additionally, since the initial introduction of biologics, there have been substantial advances in our understanding as to how biologics work, the practical realities of their administration, and how to enhance their efficacy and safety in the clinical setting. In this review, we will summarize the current state of the art for biological therapies in IBD, both in terms of agents available and their optimal use, as well as preview future advances in biologics and highly targeted small molecules in the IBD field.

Switching from originator infliximab to the biosimilar CT-P13 in 313 patients with inflammatory bowel disease

BACKGROUND

As the patents of originator biologics are expiring, biosimilar versions are becoming available for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). However, published switch studies of the first infliximab biosimilar, CT-P13, have delivered ambiguous results that could be interpreted as showing a trend towards inferior effectiveness in Crohn's disease (CD) compared with ulcerative colitis (UC). The aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness and safety of switching IBD patients from treatment with Remicade to CT-P13.

METHODS

In this prospective observational cohort study, all adult IBD patients on Remicade treatment, at four hospitals, were switched to CT-P13. The primary endpoint was change in clinical disease activity at 2, 6, and 12 months after the switch. Secondary endpoints were subgroup analyses of patients with and without concomitant immunomodulators; changes in biomarkers, quality of life, drug trough levels and anti-drug antibodies (ADAbs); and adverse events.

RESULTS

A total of 313 IBD patients were switched (195 CD; 118 UC). There were no significant changes in clinical disease activity, quality of life, biomarkers (except a small but significant increase in albumin in CD) including F-calprotectin, drug trough levels, or proportion of patients in remission. Disease worsening rates were 14.0% for CD and 13.8% for UC; and 2.7% developed ADAbs and 2.2% developed serious adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the largest study of switched IBD patients published to date, and it demonstrates that switching from Remicade to CT-P13 may be done with preserved therapeutic effectiveness and safety in both CD and UC.

Update on biosimilars in inflammatory bowel disease: Position and recommendations in Mexico

The biotechnology-derived medicines known as biosimilars are defined as non-originator treatments that have demonstrated quality, efficacy, and safety comparable to the reference biologic drug. Clinical trials have shown that the infliximab biosimilar, CT-P13, and the candidates for the adalimumab biosimilars, ABP 501 and ZRC 3197, are not significantly different, with respect to efficacy and safety, from the originator drugs in patients with other autoimmune diseases. However, controversy has arisen over the use of biosimilars in inflammatory bowel disease, due to the incipient evidence not only in patients with no previous biotechnology treatment, but also in patients in remission, that could be switched to a biosimilar for non-medical reasons. The present review is the first critical analysis by different specialists in the area of gastroenterology on the use of biosimilars in inflammatory bowel disease, the evidence on interchangeability, the extrapolation of indications, efficacy, safety, immunogenicity, and the clinical impact of the Mexican health regulations. The aim of our review was to make the positioning and recommendations of these new therapeutic options known, given that they have a potential cost-benefit for both patients and healthcare institutions.

Preparing for the incoming wave of biosimilars in oncology

With the imminent arrival of oncology biosimilars in the therapeutic paradigm, stakeholders including a clinician, specialist nurse, patient advocate, regulator and economist provide their perspective on optimising the uptake of these new agents in the treatment of cancer. A number of key messages emerge, based on the discussion that took place during a session of the European Society for Medical Oncology’s Annual Congress, ESMO Madrid 2017. First, for successful integration of biosimilars into the global healthcare paradigm, informing and educating the full scope of stakeholders, including clinicians, nurses, pharmacists and patients, is primordial. Success is dependent on providing solid evidence and ensuring all voices are heard. Second, for oncology medicines, much can be learnt from the growing experience of approved biosimilars in other disease indications, with success stories for patients, their healthcare providers and healthcare budgets alike. Finally, effective sustainability of the impact on healthcare budgets and the redirection of these savings require education and transparency.

The state of the art on treatment of Crohn's disease

Crohn's disease (CD) is a chronic, progressive, and destructive disease of the gastrointestinal tract. Although its incidence appears to be stable or decreasing in most countries in the North America and Europe, the incidence is rising rapidly in Asian countries. Immunomodulators and biologics are increasingly used to avoid long-term bowel damage and subsequent disability. Therapeutic drug monitoring facilitates optimizing thiopurines and anti-TNFs use. New biologic agents targeting various pathological pathways of CD are blooming in recent years, and the high cost of biologics and expiration of patents for several biologic agents have driven the utility of biosimilars for CD treatment. Here, the literature regarding the efficacy, safety, and withdrawal of the drugs, as well as the evolution of therapeutic targets will be reviewed.

Biosimilars in ulcerative colitis: When and for who?

The introduction of biological agents has revolutionized the management of ulcerative colitis (UC). Biosimilars are considered to be equivalent to the reference biologic products in terms of pharmacokinetic properties, clinical effectiveness and safety and have now been approved in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). CT-P13 was the first biosimilar to infliximab that obtained regulatory approval by the EMA and US FDA. Accumulating data on biosimilars led to an increased acceptance amongst practicing gastroenterologists and their use can be associated with a potential reduction in healthcare costs. This review discusses the current state of knowledge on biosimilar use in UC. Authors review the existing data on clinical efficacy, safety and immunogenicity of biosimilar infliximab and adalimumab agents. Emerging data suggests that switching from originator to biosimilar is safe for CT-P13 infliximab, however data on other biosimilars, multiple-switching, reverse-switching, or cross-switching between biosimilars is lacking. The pathway for interchangeability of biosimilars is different in the US and Europe and many aspects have yet to be clarified by federal regulators. Since the approval of the first biosimilar, the biosimilar concept seems to be successful and has led to an increased use of biosimilar drugs in the treatment of UC worldwide with a better access for patients to biologic. Real-world data from prospective observational studies for 'follow-on' biosimilars is needed to ensure that safety, efficacy and immunogenicity is comparable to the originator in IBD, and that switching from the originator or among biosimilars is a safe option.

Switching from an originator anti-TNF to a biosimilar in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: Can it be recommended? A systematic review

AIM

To review the effectiveness and safety of switching from an originator anti-TNF (Remicade^®) to a biosimilar (CT-P13) in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

METHODS

Electronic and manual search up to September 2017.

RESULTS

We identified 24 studies evaluating switching between Remicade^® and CT-P13 in 1326 patients. Disease control (no worsening after switching) was confirmed in most of the patients (weighted mean, 88%; 95% CI=86-89%). No unexpected adverse effects were reported in any of the studies.

CONCLUSION

The risks of switching from Remicade^® to a biosimilar seem to be purely theoretical and are not supported by the (still limited) real-world clinical practice experience. On the contrary, a steadily increasing number of publications have shown that there seem to be no safety or efficacy concerns about switching. Therefore, switching from originator to biosimilar infliximab in patients with IBD may be considered acceptable.

A systems pharmacology model for inflammatory bowel disease

Motivation

The literature on complex diseases is abundant but not always quantitative. This is particularly so for Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD), where many molecular pathways are qualitatively well described but this information cannot be used in traditional quantitative mathematical models employed in drug development. We propose the elaboration and validation of a logic network for IBD able to capture the information available in the literature that will facilitate the identification/validation of therapeutic targets.

Results

In this article, we propose a logic model for Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) which consists of 43 nodes and 298 qualitative interactions. The model presented is able to describe the pathogenic mechanisms of the disorder and qualitatively describes the characteristic chronic inflammation. A perturbation analysis performed on the IBD network indicates that the model is robust. Also, as described in clinical trials, a simulation of anti-TNFα, anti-IL2 and Granulocyte and Monocyte Apheresis showed a decrease in the Metalloproteinases node (MMPs), which means a decrease in tissue damage. In contrast, as clinical trials have demonstrated, a simulation of anti-IL17 and anti-IFNγ or IL10 overexpression therapy did not show any major change in MMPs expression, as corresponds to a failed therapy. The model proved to be a promising in silico tool for the evaluation of potential therapeutic targets, the identification of new IBD biomarkers, the integration of IBD polymorphisms to anticipate responders and non-responders and can be reduced and transformed in quantitative model/s.

Biosimilars in the Treatment of Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Supporting Evidence in 2017

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Monoclonal antibodies targeting tumor necrosis factor-alpha, integrin molecules, and interleukin-12/23 have become backbone therapies for Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis. While clinically effective, these biologic therapies come with significant expense, contributing to overall healthcare spending in the USA. Biosimilars have the potential to significantly reduce expenditures secondary to the use of biologic medications such as infliximab and adalimumab, though their complicated manufacturing process results in inherent differences in structure when compared to the originator compounds. In this article, we review the available literature regarding biosimilars in IBD.

RECENT FINDINGS

Several biosimilar agents to infliximab and adalimumab are currently FDA-approved, with many more currently in development. Initial clinical trials for approval have been conducted in one of the original indications for each originator biologic. There are growing data demonstrating similar clinical efficacy, immunogenicity, and safety of each of the approved infliximab and adalimumab biosimilars, both through indication extrapolation from other diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis, as well observational data in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Further research is ongoing regarding the efficacy and safety of substitution and interchangeability of biosimilars, as well as therapeutic drug monitoring for biosimilar agents. Research to date supports the utilization of reference biologics and biosimilars for new initiators, while additional data are being accrued regarding the interchangeability between these agents.