A randomised, crossover trial exploring the patient perspective and effectiveness of biosimilar adalimumab transition: IBD reference and biosimilar adalimumab cross over study (iBaSS)

BACKGROUND

Patient satisfaction has been positively associated with adherence which is expected to impact outcomes. Although vital for successful implementation of biosimilar medicines, little is known about the patient perspective of transition.

AIM

The aim of this study was to investigate clinical outcomes and patient experience of transitioning between reference adalimumab and a biosimilar (SB5).

METHOD

iBaSS is a phase IV single-centre, prospective, randomised, single-blind, cross-over study in adult subjects with Crohn's disease. Participants, stable on adalimumab before consent, received 24 weeks of treatment with both reference adalimumab and SB5. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients maintaining baseline clinical status throughout each treatment period, with patients' perspective of disease control and treatment satisfaction assessed as secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 112 participants, representative of the heterogeneous patient populations encountered in routine clinical practice, were enrolled. A similar proportion of participants maintained baseline clinical status through each treatment period: 81.8% with reference adalimumab and 79.5% with SB5. Patient reported outcomes (IBD-Control questionnaire (SB5: 15.5; reference adalimumab 15) and TSQM), adverse events and therapeutic drug monitoring remained consistent through both treatment periods, although a higher median injection pain VAS score was noted with SB5 (53/100 versus 6/100 with reference adalimumab). The number of switches undertaken in the study did not impact serum drug concentration or immunogenicity.

CONCLUSION

This study, mimicking real world adalimumab transition, demonstrates that patients undertaking brand transition can be expected to have consistent clinical and satisfaction outcomes.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTERED WITH EUDRACT

Number 2018-004967-30.

Impact of direct-access IBD physician delivered endoscopy on clinical outcomes: a pre-implementation and post-implementation study

INTRODUCTION

Patients with suspected inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) referred from primary care often face diagnostic and treatment delays. This study aimed to compare a novel direct-access IBD endoscopy pathway with the traditional care model.

METHOD

Single centre real-world study analysing primary care referrals with suspected IBD. Group A: patients triaged to direct-access IBD endoscopy. Group B: patients undergoing traditional outpatient appointments before the availability of direct-access IBD endoscopy. Demographics, fecal calprotectin (FCP), C-reactive protein (CRP), disease activity score, endoscopy findings, treatment and follow-up were collected and statistically analysed. Ranked semantic analysis of IBD symptoms contained within referral letters was performed.

RESULTS

Referral letters did not differ significantly in Groups A and B. Demographic data, FCP and CRP values were similar. Referral to treatment time (RTT) at the time of IBD endoscopy was reduced from 177 days (Group B) to 24 days (Group A) (p<0.0001). Diagnostic yield of IBD was 35.6% (Group B) versus 62.0% (Group A) (p=0.0003). 89.2% of patients underwent colonoscopy in Group B versus 46.4% in Group A. DNA rates were similar in both groups. The direct to IBD endoscopy pathway saved 100% of initial IBD consultant clinics with a 2.5-fold increase in IBD nurse-led follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Our novel pathway resulted in an 86% reduction in RTT with associated increased diagnostic yield while saving 100% of initial IBD consultant outpatient appointments. Replication in other trusts may improve patient experience and accelerate time to diagnosis/treatment while optimising the use of healthcare resources.

Transitioning from Intravenous to Subcutaneous Vedolizumab in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease [TRAVELESS]

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Subcutaneous [SC] vedolizumab presents the opportunity for inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] patients to manage their treatment at home. There are currently no data on the process of transitioning patients established on intravenous [IV] to SC vedolizumab as part of routine clinical care. The aim of this programme is to evaluate the clinical and biochemical outcomes of switching a cohort of IBD patients established on IV vedolizumab to SC, at 12 weeks following the transition.

METHODS

In all, 178 adult patients were offered the opportunity to transition to SC vedolizumab. Patients who agreed were reviewed prior to switching and at Week 12 [W12] after their first SC dose. Evaluation outcomes included disease activity scores, the IBD-Control Patient-Reported Outcome Measures [PROMs], and faecal calprotectin [FCP]. Reasons for patients declining or accepting transitioning, pharmacokinetics, adverse drug reactions, and risk factors for a poor outcome in SARS-CoV-2 infection were also assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 124 patients agreed to transition, of whom 106 patients had been on IV vedolizumab for at least 4 months. There were no statistically significant differences in disease activity scores or IBD-Control PROMs between baseline and W12. A statistically significant increase in FCP was observed [31 µg/g vs. 47 µg/g; p = 0.008], although this was unlikely to be clinically relevant. The most common adverse drug reaction reported was injection site reactions [15%]. Based on this cohort of patients, an expected reduction of £572,000 per annum is likely to be achieved.

CONCLUSIONS

Transitioning patients established on IV vedolizumab to SC appears to be safe and effective, with high patient satisfaction and multiple benefits for the health service.