Abstract
Introduction
The adalimumab biosimilar (ADAbio) Amgevita® has a similar efficacy and safety profile as the adalimumab reference (ADA) Humira®. We studied the clinical consequences of a non-medical switch from ADA to ADAbio in adult patients with mainly established rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and spondyloarthritis (SpA).
Methods
Patients that received treatment with ADA for at least three months were switched to ADAbio. Data was collected retrospectively from 1 year before the switch up to 6 months after.
Results
A total of 603 patients were switched from ADA to ADAbio (switch group). During a 1-year follow-up, over 93% of all patients underwent a successful transition in terms of disease activity and safety from ADA to biosimilar, supporting the bioequivalence of both drugs in patients with stable inflammatory rheumatic joint diseases. Forty patients (6.6%) switched back to ADA (re-switch group). There were no objective changes in disease activity score in 28 joints using C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP), or adverse effects before and after the switch between both groups.
Conclusions
In line with earlier reports, the transition to ADAbio went successful in the majority of patients with stable inflammatory rheumatic joint diseases. Patient-reported symptoms without objective signs that indicate a flare of disease activity after the switch to ADAbio are probably explained by nocebo effects. A pre-emptive approach to counteract nocebo effects and stimulate placebo response may have a positive impact on health outcomes for patients and preserve the economic benefits of cost savings that can be achieved by prescribing a biosimilar instead of the reference drug.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Patient-reported symptoms upon the non-medical switch from adalimumab reference (ADA) to biosimilar adalimumab (ADAbio) are probably explained by nocebo effects since there were no objective changes in disease activity score or adverse effects observed in our cohort of patients with established inflammatory rheumatic joint diseases, comprising RA, PsA, and SpA. |
With the growing numbers of available biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) against various targets and their biosimilars in the field of rheumatic inflammatory joint diseases, a pre-emptive strategy to counteract nocebo effects and stimulate placebo response may have a positive impact on health outcomes for patients and preserve the economic benefits of cost savings by switching from a reference drug to the less-costly biosimilar. |
Introduction
With a trial in experimental sepsis over 20 years ago, the first tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitor was introduced with cA2 monoclonal antibody, now known as infliximab [1], which was later followed by a randomized study in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) [2]. From then, TNF inhibitors (TNFis) that neutralize TNF as central orchestrator of the pathogenesis of multiple inflammatory diseases [3, 4] revolutionized the treatment strategy in patients with RA, psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and spondyloarthritis (SpA) [5,6,7,8,9,10].
Since then, a new era has arrived with the advent of innovative medications that have many different drug targets and a growing number of available biosimilars. After the launch of Inflectra® and Remsima®, the biosimilar versions of TNFi infliximab (2013), and subsequently Benepali® (2016), an etanercept biosimilar to the Dutch market [11,12,13,14], Amgevita® (ABP 501; Amgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, USA) was approved as adalimumab biosimilar in the Netherlands. It was registered in 2017 for the same indications and with a similar safety profile as the adalimumab reference (ADA) Humira® (AbbVie Inc., North Chicago, IL, USA) [13].
A large number of studies, including randomized control trials, have demonstrated that switching from a reference TNFi to its biosimilar has no significant effect on disease activity, safety, and immunogenicity, suggesting therapeutic equivalence [15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27]. As TNFi are prescribed in large numbers of patients with various chronic inflammatory disorders including the musculoskeletal system, gastro-intestinal tract, and skin, non-medical switching from a reference biomedicine to a biosimilar could have a large socioeconomic impact [28,29,30]. Beyond the economic advantage, expansion of the biosimilar market may lead to further improvements of the reference drug, including the design of the injection device and product service.
Despite these benefits, switching from reference biomedicine to biosimilar may introduce subjective symptoms or adverse effects in patients otherwise classified as stable disease. In the absence of any objective clinical data, this alteration in the patient-reported outcomes may be explained by nocebo effects that challenge the principle of interchangeability from the patient's point of view, and may be detrimental to patient confidence and drug compliance [31,32,33,34].
The aim of our study is to evaluate the non-medical transition from ADA to ADAbio in a cohort of patients with established and stable inflammatory rheumatic joints disease involving RA, PsA, and SpA.
Methods
Patients and Disease Activity Score
In November 2018, a total of 603 adult patients in the Maasstad Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands were treated with ADA. All patients had an established diagnosis of either RA, PsA, SpA, or incidentally juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) and sarcoidosis.
Stable disease was defined as disease remission or low disease activity (DAS28 2.6–3.2) during treatment with ADA for at least 3 months before the switch to ADAbio.
In November 2018, all patients underwent a non-medical switch of ADA to ADAbio after being informed by a formal letter in November 2018 and, on request, via additional face-to-face consultation with the nurse practitioner or rheumatologist. There were no exclusion criteria for eligibility for this study except age of at least 16 years or older. Clinical data, including age, sex, disease duration, smoking habits, co-medication, and disease activity scores in 28 joints (DAS28) C-reactive protein (CRP) in patients diagnosed with RA and PsA was collected from the electronic medical/health record system (HIX, Chipsoft, The Netherlands) retrospectively in the 1-year period before the switch up to 6 months after the switch. Disease activity indicated by the composite index DAS28-CRP in all switchers with RA and PsA was determined between May 2019 and November 2019.
The last measured DAS28-CRP before and after the non-medical switch were determined in the 1-year period before the switch up to 6 months after the switch.
All eligible patients, when admitted to our outpatient clinic, agreed that their clinical and laboratory data may be used for clinical practice analysis to improve care in an anonymous manner (opt-out procedure). Therefore, this study has been granted an exemption from requiring ethics approval. Personal data was handled in compliance with the Dutch Personal Data Protection Act and the privacy regulations of the Maasstad Hospital. This study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki of 1964 and its later amendments.
Design and Statistical Analysis
The basis of our report was the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement [35]. Data were analyzed using SPSS software (version 23 for Windows; SPSS, Inc.).
Comparative statistical evaluations were performed by Wilcoxon signed-ranks tests, Kruskal–Wallis tests, independent sampled t tests, and Mann–Whitney test. Data are reported as means ± SEM. In all analyses, a two-sided p value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Results
A total of 603 patients with the established diagnosis RA, PsA, and to a lesser extent SpA, and few others involving patients with JIA and sarcoidosis underwent a non-medical transition of ADA to ADAbio (switch group). The average duration of ADA therapy before the switch was 88 ± 8 months, and ADA was primarily used as first or second bDMARD in these patient cohorts. At the initiation of the transition, the average age was 55 years (range, 41–82 years), and 56.5 percent of the patients were female and the majority were Caucasian. Co-medication was used in 69.1% of all patients, including conventional DMARDs (cDMARDs) methotrexate, leflunomide, sulfasalazine, and/or hydroxychloroquine (28.1%), glucocorticoids (9.1%) and NSAIDs (13.9%).
In the 1-year follow-up, the transition to ADAbio went successfully in terms of disease activity and safety in over 93% of the patients with stable inflammatory rheumatic joint diseases. However, 40 patients (6.6%) of this group gradually switched back to the bio-originator (re-switch group) by using shared decision-making. To get a better understanding of the clinical arguments for this re-switch, we compared the clinical characteristics of the re-switch group (n = 40) with that of the patients (n = 563) that continued their use of ADAbio (listed in Table 1).
The distribution of median age, sex, race, and smoking status were comparable in both groups. RA, PsA, and SpA were the most common inflammatory rheumatic joints diseases amongst the re-switch group and switch group. In the re-switch group, however, the percentage of RA patients was lower as compared to the switch group, whereas PsA and SpA were slightly more present (p = 0.22).
The treatment schedule and dosage of adalimumab 40 mg every other week was not significantly different in either of the groups, which was 87.5% of the patients in the re-switch group versus 83.7% in switch group (p = 0.52). In the re-switch group, 35% of the patients used cDMARDs in addition to TNFi as compared to 28.1% of the patients in the switch group (p = 0.35). The total percentage of patients without co-medication was higher in the re-switch group (40%) than in the switch group (31.8%, p = 0.28). The mean dosage of glucocorticoids (prednisolone or equivalent) was 12 mg daily in the re-switch group (10.0%) versus 9.5 mg daily in the switch group (9.1%). There was no statistically significant difference in median disease duration between the re-switch and switch group, respectively (122 vs. 104 months; p = 0.094). The median duration of ADA use before the switch to ADAbio was 2.8 years in the switch group, and 7 years in the re-switch (p = 0.018). We set out to address the clinical impact of the re-switch on the disease activity score, as indicated by the composite index DAS28-CRP, in the patients with RA and PsA. SpA patients were not included in this analysis because of missing values in the composite disease activity scores.
In the re-switch group, the disease activity was measured as the last available clinical score within a period of 1 year before and 6 months after the switch back to ADA. As shown in Fig. 1, no significant difference in disease activity (DAS28-CRP) was observed in these RA (n = 13) and PsA patients (n = 10, data not available for 3/13 patients) before and after the non-medical switch (p = 0.31). In addition, there were no significant differences in swollen joints (SJ), tender joints (TJ) and, visual analog scale (VAS) between RA and PsA patients, respectively (p = 0.20, p = 0.76, p = 0.66). DAS28 and CRP did not change in patients that not reswitch (non-reswitchers).
The most important reasons for switching back to ADA, as predominantly instigated by the patient, included an increase in arthralgias with or without stiffness (n = 28; 70%), decrease in therapeutic efficacy in a broader sense (n = 2, 5%), unpleasant experience with the injection device (an auto-injection pen versus prefilled syringe; n = 2, 5%), self-reported worsening of psoriasis in PsA (n = 1, 2.5%), and various other subjective causes (see pie chart Fig. 2).
In the re-switch group, 24 patients (60%) experienced clinical improvement after the switch back to ADA, which cannot be explained by a relevant difference in disease activity between the re-switch group and switch group. Seven patients (17.5%) of the re-switch group did not notice any differences in their symptoms. Finally, three of these seven patients switched to therapies with other modes-of-action. One patient started with another TNFi, and two other patients switched to cDMARD monotherapy.
Discussion
To the best of our knowledge, this is one of the largest single-center, real-life observational studies that report on the clinical follow-up data upon the non-medical transition from ADA to ADAbio in a cohort of 603 patients with an established diagnosis of primarily RA, PsA, and SpA [36,37,38,39]. Using a comprehensive approach, we are the first to report on successful non-medical switch from adalimumab reference Humira® (ADA) to adalimumab biosimilar Amgevita® (ADAbio) that rendered stable disease activity after transition.
A total of 40 patients (6.6%) were gradually shifted back to the bio-originator, which was largely instigated by patients that reported an increase in arthralgias and stiffness without measurable enhancement of disease activity. Since the disease activity indicates no flare of disease after the transition to ADAbio, we believe that patient-reported symptoms that triggered the switch back to the bio-originator are probably explained by nocebo effects. RA, PsA, and SpA were evenly distributed amongst the re-switch group and the remaining patients of the cohort that underwent the initial transition to the biosimilar.
Our findings indicate that over 93% of the patients in our cohort comprising RA, PsA, and SpA readily underwent the transition to ADAbio and experienced no signs of flare of disease activity or adverse effects. Our observation highly supports the therapeutic equivalence of ADA and ADAbio and is in line with earlier studies [16,17,18, 21,22,23, 25, 39]. Six patients refused to switch, and of 86 patients (14.3%) disease activity is not well controlled.
-
We believe that our department has achieved this success by the huge efforts to carefully inform and educate our patients and operational staff including nurse practitioners, nursing staff at the day hospital, residents and medical doctors on the interchangeability of both biomedicines and the economic benefits in this growing sector of expensive drugs in advance to the transition [39, 40].
We were unable to find differences in clinical characteristics including co-medication, smoking habits, gender, and disease duration that could explain the switch back to the bio-originator between the patients that continued the use of ADAbio and the re-switch group.
In addition, we noted that there was no significant change in clinical scores of disease activity in the RA and PsA patients of the re-switch group upon switching back to the bio-originator, which is in line with other studies [15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26, 39].
In the majority of patients that re-switched to the bio-originator, the decision was instigated by largely patient-reported symptoms. In none of these patients was a re-challenge with the ADAbio performed, although this strategy would have provided evidence for a causal link. Given the absence of measurable worsening of disease activity, nocebo effects probably played an important role in the shared decision between patient and rheumatologist to switch back to the bio-originator. However, discriminating between nocebo effects and true adverse effects, fluctuations in clinical course, and loss of therapeutic efficiency could be difficult, particularly in patients with established inflammatory rheumatic joint diseases that may be less capable to comprehend scientific data and biased because of loss in therapy response and adverse effects in the past [41].
As a shortcoming of this study, we noted that the documentation of disease activity scores including the DAS28-CRP before and after transition to ADAbio was suboptimal in a few cases. This may have been caused by the magnitude of this operation in our large cohort of established inflammatory rheumatic joint diseases. Another limitation of our study is that we could not objectify patient-reported response outcomes. Implementation of instruments to measure patient-reported response outcomes in RA patients was only recently realized and not yet in PsA and SpA patients.
In our local hospital, the costs of adalimumab reference is about three times that of its biosimilar. As anticipated, the costs savings and socio-economic impact that resulted from the transition to ADAbio was indisputably considerable. However, the emerging costs that accompanied the re-switch to the bio-originator threatened to overshadow the initial success. This finding warrants the decision to switch for (non-)medical and economic reasons to other biosimilars on a case-by-case basis.
Conclusions
In conclusion, this large real-life observational study demonstrates that the transition to ADAbio went successfully in the majority of patients with stable inflammatory rheumatic joint diseases. The absence of objective measurements, indicating increased disease activity, which could have supported the patient-reported symptoms after the switch to ADAbio, suggests that nocebo effects most likely played a decisive role in the shared decision between patient and rheumatologist to switch back to the bio-originator. A pre-emptive approach to counteract nocebo effects and stimulate placebo response may have a positive impact on health outcomes for patients and preserve the economic benefits of cost savings that can be achieved by prescribing a biosimilar instead of reference drug.
References
Tracey KJ, Fong Y, Hesse DG, Manogue KR, Lee AT, Kuo GC, Lowry SF, Cerami A. Anti-cachectin/TNF monoclonal antibodies prevent septic shock during lethal bacteraemia. Nature. 1987;330:662–4.
Elliott MJ, Maini RN, Feldmann M, Kalden JR, Antoni C, Smolen JS, Leeb B, Breedveld FC, Macfarlane JD, Bijl H, et al. Randomised double-blind comparison of chimeric monoclonal antibody to tumour necrosis factor alpha (cA2) versus placebo in rheumatoid arthritis. Lancet. 1994;344:1105–10.
Kalliolias GD, Ivashkiv LB. TNF biology, pathogenic mechanisms and emerging therapeutic strategies. Nat Rev Rheumatol. 2016;12:49–62.
Markus R, McBride HJ, Ramchandani M, Chow V, Liu J, Mytych D, Fanjiang G. A review of the totality of evidence supporting the development of the first adalimumab biosimilar ABP 501. Adv Ther. 2019;36:1833–50.
Braun J, Sieper J. Biological therapies in the spondyloarthritides–the current state. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2004;43:1072–84.
Chew AL, Bennett A, Smith CH, Barker J, Kirkham B. Successful treatment of severe psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis with adalimumab. Br J Dermatol. 2004;151:492–6.
Cush JJ. Safety overview of new disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Rheum Dis Clin North Am. 2004;30(237–55):v.
Mease PJ and Antoni CE. Psoriatic arthritis treatment: biological response modifiers. Ann Rheum Dis. 2005;64 Suppl 2:ii78–82.
Rau R. Adalimumab (a fully human anti-tumour necrosis factor alpha monoclonal antibody) in the treatment of active rheumatoid arthritis: the initial results of five trials. Ann Rheum Dis. 2002;61 Suppl 2:ii70–3.
Sieper J, van der Heijde D, Dougados M, Mease PJ, Maksymowych WP, Brown MA, Arora V, Pangan AL. Efficacy and safety of adalimumab in patients with non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis: results of a randomised placebo-controlled trial (ABILITY-1). Ann Rheum Dis. 2013;72:815–22.
Danese S, Bonovas S, Peyrin-Biroulet L. Biosimilars in IBD: from theory to practice. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2017;14:22–31.
Schreiber S, Luger T, Mittendorf T, Mrowietz U, Muller-Ladner U, Schroder J, Stallmach A and Bokemeyer B. [Evolution of biologicals in inflammation medicine--biosimilars in gastroenterology, rheumatology and dermatology]
Evolution der Biologika in der Entzundungsmedizin--Biosimilars in Gastroenterologie, Rheumatologie und Dermatologie. Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 2014;139:2399–404.
Moots R, Azevedo V, Coindreau JL, Dorner T, Mahgoub E, Mysler E, Scheinberg M, Marshall L. Switching between reference biologics and biosimilars for the treatment of rheumatology, gastroenterology, and dermatology inflammatory conditions: considerations for the clinician. Curr Rheumatol Rep. 2017;19:37.
Ebbers HC, Pieper B, Issa A, Addison J, Freudensprung U, Rezk MF. Real-world evidence on etanercept biosimilar SB4 in etanercept-naive or switching patients: a systematic review. Rheumatol Ther. 2019;6:317–38.
Choe JY, Prodanovic N, Niebrzydowski J, Staykov I, Dokoupilova E, Baranauskaite A, Yatsyshyn R, Mekic M, Porawska W, Ciferska H, Jedrychowicz-Rosiak K, Zielinska A, Choi J, Rho YH, Smolen JS. A randomised, double-blind, phase III study comparing SB2, an infliximab biosimilar, to the infliximab reference product Remicade in patients with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate therapy. Ann Rheum Dis. 2017;76:58–64.
Cohen S, Genovese MC, Choy E, Perez-Ruiz F, Matsumoto A, Pavelka K, Pablos JL, Rizzo W, Hrycaj P, Zhang N, Shergy W, Kaur P. Efficacy and safety of the biosimilar ABP 501 compared with adalimumab in patients with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis: a randomised, double-blind, phase III equivalence study. Ann Rheum Dis. 2017;76:1679–87.
Cohen SB, Alonso-Ruiz A, Klimiuk PA, Lee EC, Peter N, Sonderegger I, Assudani D. Similar efficacy, safety and immunogenicity of adalimumab biosimilar BI 695501 and Humira reference product in patients with moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis: results from the phase III randomised VOLTAIRE-RA equivalence study. Ann Rheum Dis. 2018;77:914–21.
Ebbers HC, Schellekens H. Are we ready to close the discussion on the interchangeability of biosimilars? Drug Discov Today. 2019;24:1963–7.
Emery P, Vencovsky J, Sylwestrzak A, Leszczynski P, Porawska W, Baranauskaite A, Tseluyko V, Zhdan VM, Stasiuk B, Milasiene R, Barrera Rodriguez AA, Cheong SY, Ghil J. A phase III randomised, double-blind, parallel-group study comparing SB4 with etanercept reference product in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate therapy. Ann Rheum Dis. 2017;76:51–7.
Emery P, Vencovsky J, Sylwestrzak A, Leszczynski P, Porawska W, Stasiuk B, Hilt J, Mosterova Z, Cheong SY and Ghil J. Long-term efficacy and safety in patients with rheumatoid arthritis continuing on SB4 or switching from reference etanercept to SB4. Ann Rheum Dis. 2017.
Feagan BG, Lam G, Ma C, Lichtenstein GR. Systematic review: efficacy and safety of switching patients between reference and biosimilar infliximab. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2019;49:31–40.
Kay J, Dorner T, Emery P, Kvien TK, Breedveld FC. Clinical trial and “real-world” data support switching from a bio-originator to its biosimilar. Ann Rheum Dis. 2020;79: e44.
Layegh Z, Ruwaard J, Hebing RCF, MJ LA, van der Weele W, Nurmohamed MT, Krieckaert C and Wolbink G. Efficacious transition from reference infliximab to biosimilar infliximab in clinical practice. Int J Rheum Dis. 2019;22:869–873.
Park W, Yoo DH, Jaworski J, Brzezicki J, Gnylorybov A, Kadinov V, Sariego IG, Abud-Mendoza C, Escalante WJ, Kang SW, Andersone D, Blanco F, Hong SS, Lee SH, Braun J. Comparable long-term efficacy, as assessed by patient-reported outcomes, safety and pharmacokinetics, of CT-P13 and reference infliximab in patients with ankylosing spondylitis: 54-week results from the randomized, parallel-group PLANETAS study. Arthritis Res Ther. 2016;18:25.
Weinblatt ME, Baranauskaite A, Dokoupilova E, Zielinska A, Jaworski J, Racewicz A, Pileckyte M, Jedrychowicz-Rosiak K, Baek I, Ghil J. Switching from reference adalimumab to SB5 (Adalimumab Biosimilar) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: fifty-two-week phase III randomized study results. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2018;70:832–40.
Yoo DH, Hrycaj P, Miranda P, Ramiterre E, Piotrowski M, Shevchuk S, Kovalenko V, Prodanovic N, Abello-Banfi M, Gutierrez-Urena S, Morales-Olazabal L, Tee M, Jimenez R, Zamani O, Lee SJ, Kim H, Park W, Muller-Ladner U. A randomised, double-blind, parallel-group study to demonstrate equivalence in efficacy and safety of CT-P13 compared with innovator infliximab when coadministered with methotrexate in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis: the PLANETRA study. Ann Rheum Dis. 2013;72:1613–20.
Barbier L, Ebbers HC, Declerck P, Simoens S, Vulto AG and Huys I. The Efficacy, Safety, and Immunogenicity of Switching Between Reference Biopharmaceuticals and Biosimilars: A Systematic Review. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2020.
Araujo FC, Goncalves J, Fonseca JE. Biosimilars in rheumatology. Pharmacol Res. 2019;149: 104467.
Sarzi-Puttini P, Marotto D, Caporali R, Galeazzi M, Atzeni F, Hamar A, Soos B, Szekanecz Z. Biosimilars vs originators: Are they the same? Autoimmun Rev. 2019;18: 102404.
Schulze-Koops H and Skapenko A. Biosimilars in rheumatology: A review of the evidence and their place in the treatment algorithm. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2017;56:iv30-iv48.
Germain V, Scherlinger M, Barnetche T, Schaeverbeke T, Federation H-U. Long-term follow-up after switching from originator infliximab to its biosimilar CT-P13: the weight of nocebo effect. Ann Rheum Dis. 2020;79: e11.
Kravvariti E, Kitas GD, Mitsikostas DD and Sfikakis PP. Nocebos in rheumatology: emerging concepts and their implications for clinical practice. Nat Rev Rheumatol. 2018;14:727–740.
Numan S, Faccin F. Non-medical switching from originator tumor necrosis factor inhibitors to their biosimilars: systematic review of randomized controlled trials and real-world studies. Adv Ther. 2018;35:1295–332.
van Bodegraven AA, Boone NW. Editorial: nocebo effect and switching to biosimilars. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2018;47:850–1.
Elm v. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Lancet. 2007;370:1453–7.
Glintborg B, Ibsen R, Bilbo REQ, Lund Hetland M, Kjellberg J. Does a mandatory non-medical switch from originator to biosimilar etanercept lead to increase in healthcare use and costs? A Danish register-based study of patients with inflammatory arthritis. RMD Open. 2019;5: e001016.
Glintborg B, Loft AG, Omerovic E, Hendricks O, Linauskas A, Espesen J, Danebod K, Jensen DV, Nordin H, Dalgaard EB, Chrysidis S, Kristensen S, Raun JL, Lindegaard H, Manilo N, Jakobsen SH, Hansen IMJ, Dalsgaard Pedersen D, Sorensen IJ, Andersen LS, Grydehoj J, Mehnert F, Krogh NS and Hetland ML. To switch or not to switch: results of a nationwide guideline of mandatory switching from originator to biosimilar etanercept. One-year treatment outcomes in 2061 patients with inflammatory arthritis from the DANBIO registry. Ann Rheum Dis. 2019;78:192–200.
Glintborg B, Sorensen IJ, Loft AG, Lindegaard H, Linauskas A, Hendricks O, Hansen IMJ, Jensen DV, Manilo N, Espesen J, Klarlund M, Grydehoj J, Dieperink SS, Kristensen S, Olsen JS, Nordin H, Chrysidis S, Dalsgaard Pedersen D, Sorensen MV, Andersen LS, Gron KL, Krogh NS, Pedersen L, Hetland ML and all departments of rheumatology in D. A nationwide non-medical switch from originator infliximab to biosimilar CT-P13 in 802 patients with inflammatory arthritis: 1-year clinical outcomes from the DANBIO registry. Ann Rheum Dis. 2017;76:1426–1431.
Tweehuysen L, Huiskes VJB, van den Bemt BJF, Vriezekolk JE, Teerenstra S, van den Hoogen FHJ, van den Ende CH, den Broeder AA. Open-label, non-mandatory transitioning from originator etanercept to biosimilar SB4: six-month results from a controlled cohort study. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2018;70:1408–18.
Colloca L, Barsky AJ. Placebo and nocebo effects. N Engl J Med. 2020;382:554–61.
Kravvariti E, Kitas GD and Sfikakis PP. The role of the Nocebo effect in the use of biosimilars in routine rheumatology clinical practice. Mediterr J Rheumatol. 2019;30:63–68.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Funding
No funding or sponsorship was received for this study or publication of this article. The Rapid Service Fee was funded by the authors.
Author Contributions
Roxanne C.S. van Adrichem, Geeke J. Waverijn and Radjesh J. Bisoendial designed the research, analyzed data and wrote the paper. Hanneke J.E. Voorneveld and Marc R. Kok wrote the paper.
Disclosures
Roxanne C.S. van Adrichem, Hanneke J.E. Voorneveld, Geeke J. Waverijn, Marc R. Kok, and Radjesh J. Bisoendial have nothing to disclose.
Compliance with Ethics Guidelines
All eligible patients, when admitted to our outpatient clinic, agreed that their clinical and laboratory data may be used for clinical practice analysis to improve care in an anonymous manner (opt-out procedure). Therefore, this study has been granted an exemption from requiring ethics approval. Personal data were handled in compliance with the Dutch Personal Data Protection Act and the privacy regulations of the Maasstad Hospital. This study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki of 1964 and its later amendments.
Data Availability
Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
van Adrichem, R.C.S., Voorneveld, H.J.E., Waverijn, G.J. et al. The Non-medical Switch from Reference Adalimumab to Biosimilar Adalimumab is Highly Successful in a Large Cohort of Patients with Stable Inflammatory Rheumatic Joint Diseases: A Real-Life Observational Study. Rheumatol Ther 9, 1109–1118 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40744-022-00465-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40744-022-00465-6