Advertisement

BioDrugs

pp 1–11 | Cite as

Immunogenicity of Biosimilars for Rheumatic Diseases, Plaque Psoriasis, and Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Review from Clinical Trials and Regulatory Documents

  • Vibeke StrandEmail author
  • Joao Gonçalves
  • Timothy P. Hickling
  • Heather E. Jones
  • Lisa Marshall
  • John D. Isaacs
Review Article

Abstract

The goal of this narrative review was to summarize immunogenicity data of biosimilars or biosimilar candidates for rheumatic diseases, plaque psoriasis, or inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), available in peer-reviewed publications or regulatory documents. PubMed records and regulatory documents were searched for immunogenicity data of TNFα or CD20 inhibitor biosimilars or biosimilar candidates. Data collected included the proportion of patients positive for anti-drug antibodies (ADAbs), proportion with neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) among ADAb-positive patients, ADAb/nAb assay characteristics, cross-reactivity, and the effects of ADAbs on pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, efficacy, and safety. We identified eight biosimilars or biosimilar candidates for adalimumab (BI 695501, SB5, ABP 501, GP2017, PF-06410293, MSB-11022, FKB-327, ZRC-3197) four for etanercept (SB4, GP2015, CHS-0214, LBEC0101), and three each for infliximab (SB2, CT-P13, GP1111) and rituximab (CT-P10, GP2013, PF-05280586) with immunogenicity data. Randomized, head-to-head trials with reference products varied in design and methodology of ADAb/nAb detection. The lowest proportions of ADAb-positive (0–13%) and nAb-positive patients (0–3%) were observed in the trials of etanercept and its biosimilars, and the highest with adalimumab, infliximab, and their biosimilars (ADAbs: ≤ 64%; nAbs: ≤ 100%). The most common method of ADAb detection was electrochemiluminescence, and ADAb positivity was associated with nominally inferior efficacy and safety. Overall, there were no significant immunogenicity differences between biosimilars and reference products. However, there are many discrepancies in assessing and reporting clinical immunogenicity. In conclusion, immunogenicity data of biosimilars or biosimilar candidates for TNFα or CD20 inhibitors were collected in trials that varied in design and procedures for ADAb/nAb detection. In general, immunogenicity parameters of biosimilars are similar to those of their reference products.

Notes

Acknowledgements

Medical writing assistance was provided by Vojislav Pejović, Ph.D., of Engage Scientific Solutions, and was funded by Pfizer.

Author contributions

The study was initially conceived by VS and LM; the initial concept was further refined and expanded by JG, JDI, TPH, and HEJ, LS, JG, JDI, and LM supervised data acquisition and analysis. All authors contributed to data interpretation, drafting, and critical revision of the drafts. All authors provided a final approval of the version to be published and agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Funding

This review was sponsored by Pfizer.

Conflict of interest

Professor Isaacs and work in the Isaacs’ laboratory are supported in part by NIHR Newcastle Biomedical Research Centre, based at Newcastle Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and Newcastle University and by the Research into Inflammatory Arthritis Centre Versus Arthritis. V. Strand has received consulting fees or honoraria from AbbVie, Amgen, Asana, AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Celltrion, EMD Serono, Genentech/Roche, GSK, Janssen, Kezar, Kypha, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Samsung Bioepis, Sandoz, Sanofi, and UCB. J. Gonçalves has received speaker fees from Amgen, Biogen, Celltrion, Libbs, Novartis, Pfizer, Samsung Bioepis, and Sandoz. J. D. Isaacs has received speaker or consulting fees from AbbVie, Biogen, BMS, Celltrion, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Merck, Merck Serono, Pfizer, and Roche. T. P. Hickling is an employee of Pfizer and may own company stock. H. E. Jones and L. Marshall were employees of Pfizer during the development of the manuscript and may own company stock.

Supplementary material

40259_2019_394_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (613 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 614 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Dörner T, Strand V, Castaneda-Hernandez G, Ferraccioli G, Isaacs JD, Kvien TK, et al. The role of biosimilars in the treatment of rheumatic diseases. Ann Rheum Dis. 2013;72(3):322–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dörner T, Strand V, Cornes P, Goncalves J, Gulacsi L, Kay J, et al. The changing landscape of biosimilars in rheumatology. Ann Rheum Dis. 2016;75(6):974–82.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Strand V, Kimberly R, Isaacs JD. Biologic therapies in rheumatology: lessons learned, future directions. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2007;6(1):75–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ellis AG, Flohr C, Drucker AM. Network meta-analyses of systemic treatments for psoriasis: a critical appraisal. Br J Dermatol. 2019;180(2):282–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rawla P, Sunkara T, Raj JP. Role of biologics and biosimilars in inflammatory bowel disease: current trends and future perspectives. J Inflamm Res. 2018;11:215–26.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Singh JA, Saag KG, Bridges SL Jr, Akl EA, Bannuru RR, Sullivan MC, et al. 2015 American College of Rheumatology Guideline for the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2016;68(1):1–25.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Smolen JS, Landewe R, Bijlsma J, Burmester G, Chatzidionysiou K, Dougados M, et al. EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: 2016 update. Ann Rheum Dis. 2017;76(6):960–77.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Guidelines on Evaluation of Similar Biotherapeutic Products (SBPs). 2009. http://www.who.int/biologicals/areas/biological_therapeutics/BIOTHERAPEUTICS_FOR_WEB_22APRIL2010.pdf.
  9. 9.
    Guideline on similar biological medicinal products containing biotechnology-derived proteins as active substance: non-clinical and clinical issues (EMEA/CHMP/BMWP/42832/2005 Rev1). 2014. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2015/01/WC500180219.pdf. Accessed 10 Apr 2019.
  10. 10.
    Scientific Considerations in Demonstrating Biosimilarity to a Reference Product. Guidance for Industry. 2015. https://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM291128.pdf. Accessed 10 Apr 2019.
  11. 11.
    Krieckaert C, Rispens T, Wolbink G. Immunogenicity of biological therapeutics: from assay to patient. Curr Opin Rheumatol. 2012;24(3):306–11.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Guideline on Immunogenicity assessment of therapeutic proteins (EMEA/CHMP/BMWP/14327/2006 Rev 1). 2017. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2017/06/WC500228861.pdf. Accessed 10 Apr 2019.
  13. 13.
    Immunogenicity Testing of Therapeutic Protein Products—Developing and Validating Assays for Anti-Drug Antibody Detection. Guidance for Industry. 2019. https://www.fda.gov/media/119788/download. Accessed 15 May 2019.
  14. 14.
    Shankar G, Arkin S, Cocea L, Devanarayan V, Kirshner S, Kromminga A, et al. Assessment and reporting of the clinical immunogenicity of therapeutic proteins and peptides-harmonized terminology and tactical recommendations. AAPS J. 2014;16(4):658–73.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pineda C, Castaneda Hernandez G, Jacobs IA, Alvarez DF, Carini C. Assessing the immunogenicity of biopharmaceuticals. Biodrugs. 2016;30(3):195–206.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gorovits B, Baltrukonis DJ, Bhattacharya I, Birchler MA, Finco D, Sikkema D, et al. Immunoassay methods used in clinical studies for the detection of anti-drug antibodies to adalimumab and infliximab. Clin Exp Immunol. 2018;192(3):348–65.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wang YM, Wang J, Hon YY, Zhou L, Fang L, Ahn HY. Evaluating and reporting the immunogenicity impacts for biological products—a clinical pharmacology perspective. AAPS J. 2016;18(2):395–403.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rup B, Pallardy M, Sikkema D, Albert T, Allez M, Broet P, et al. Standardizing terms, definitions and concepts for describing and interpreting unwanted immunogenicity of biopharmaceuticals: recommendations of the Innovative Medicines Initiative ABIRISK consortium. Clin Exp Immunol. 2015;181(3):385–400.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wynne C, Altendorfer M, Sonderegger I, Gheyle L, Ellis-Pegler R, Buschke S, et al. Bioequivalence, safety and immunogenicity of BI 695501, an adalimumab biosimilar candidate, compared with the reference biologic in a randomized, double-blind, active comparator phase I clinical study (VOLTAIRE(R)-PK) in healthy subjects. Expert Opin Investig Drugs. 2016;25(12):1361–70.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Shin D, Lee Y, Kim H, Kornicke T, Fuhr R. A randomized phase I comparative pharmacokinetic study comparing SB5 with reference adalimumab in healthy volunteers. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2017;42(6):672–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kaur P, Chow V, Zhang N, Moxness M, Kaliyaperumal A, Markus R. A randomised, single-blind, single-dose, three-arm, parallel-group study in healthy subjects to demonstrate pharmacokinetic equivalence of ABP 501 and adalimumab. Ann Rheum Dis. 2017;76(3):526–33.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Puri A, Niewiarowski A, Arai Y, Nomura H, Baird M, Dalrymple I, et al. Pharmacokinetics, safety, tolerability and immunogenicity of FKB327, a new biosimilar medicine of adalimumab/Humira, in healthy subjects. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2017;83(7):1405–15.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Assessment Report: Hyrimoz (Procedure No. EMEA/H/C/004320/0000). 2018. https://www.ema.europa.eu/documents/assessment-report/hyrimoz-epar-public-assessment-report_en.pdf. Accessed 10 Apr 2019.
  24. 24.
    Hyland E, Mant T, Vlachos P, Attkins N, Ullmann M, Roy S, et al. Comparison of the pharmacokinetics, safety, and immunogenicity of MSB11022, a biosimilar of adalimumab, with Humira((R)) in healthy subjects. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2016;82(4):983–93.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lee YJ, Shin D, Kim Y, Kang J, Gauliard A, Fuhr R. A randomized phase l pharmacokinetic study comparing SB4 and etanercept reference product (Enbrel(R)) in healthy subjects. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2016;82(1):64–73.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Assessment Report: Erelzi (EMA/CHMP/302222/2017). 2017. https://www.ema.europa.eu/documents/assessment-report/erelzi-epar-public-assessment-report_en.pdf. Accessed 10 Apr 2019.
  27. 27.
    Lee H, Chung H, Lee S, Lee H, Yang SM, Yoon SH, et al. LBEC0101, a proposed etanercept biosimilar: pharmacokinetics, immunogenicity, and tolerability profiles compared with a reference biologic product in healthy male subjects. Biodrugs. 2017;31(4):349–55.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Shin D, Kim Y, Kim YS, Kornicke T, Fuhr R. A randomized, phase I pharmacokinetic study comparing SB2 and infliximab reference product (Remicade((R))) in healthy subjects. Biodrugs. 2015;29(6):381–8.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Park W, Lee SJ, Yun J, Yoo DH. Comparison of the pharmacokinetics and safety of three formulations of infliximab (CT-P13, EU-approved reference infliximab and the US-licensed reference infliximab) in healthy subjects: a randomized, double-blind, three-arm, parallel-group, single-dose, phase I study. Expert Rev Clin Immunol. 2015;11(Suppl 1):S25–31.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Cohen SB, Alonso-Ruiz A, Klimiuk PA, Lee EC, Peter N, Sonderegger I, et al. 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(6):914–21.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Weinblatt ME, Baranauskaite A, Niebrzydowski J, Dokoupilova E, Zielinska A, Jaworski J, et al. Phase III randomized study of SB5, an adalimumab biosimilar, versus reference adalimumab in patients with moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2018;70(1):40–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Cohen S, Genovese MC, Choy E, Perez-Ruiz F, Matsumoto A, Pavelka K, et al. 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(10):1679–87.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Assessment Report: Hulio (EMEA/H/C/004429/0000). 2018. https://www.ema.europa.eu/documents/assessment-report/hulio-epar-public-assessment-report_en.pdf. Accessed 11 Apr 2019.
  34. 34.
    Fleischmann RM, Alten R, Pileckyte M, Lobello K, Hua SY, Cronenberger C, et al. A comparative clinical study of PF-06410293, a candidate adalimumab biosimilar, and adalimumab reference product (Humira(R)) in the treatment of active rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Res Ther. 2018;20(1):178.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Jani RH, Gupta R, Bhatia G, Rathi G, Ashok Kumar P, Sharma R, et al. A prospective, randomized, double-blind, multicentre, parallel-group, active controlled study to compare efficacy and safety of biosimilar adalimumab (Exemptia; ZRC-3197) and adalimumab (Humira) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Int J Rheum Dis. 2016;19(11):1157–68.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Emery P, Vencovsky J, Sylwestrzak A, Leszczynski P, Porawska W, Baranauskaite A, et al. 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(1):51–7.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    O’Dell J, Takeuchi T, Tanaka Y, Louw I, Tiabut T, Kai M, et al. OP0226 randomized, double-blind study comparing Chs-0214 with etanercept in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) despite methotrexate (MTX) therapy. Ann Rheum Dis. 2016;75(Suppl 2):143.1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Matsuno H, Tomomitsu M, Hagino A, Shin S, Lee J, Song YW. Phase III, multicentre, double-blind, randomised, parallel-group study to evaluate the similarities between LBEC0101 and etanercept reference product in terms of efficacy and safety in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis inadequately responding to methotrexate. Ann Rheum Dis. 2018;77(4):488–94.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Choe JY, Prodanovic N, Niebrzydowski J, Staykov I, Dokoupilova E, Baranauskaite A, et al. 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(1):58–64.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Park W, Hrycaj P, Jeka S, Kovalenko V, Lysenko G, Miranda P, et al. A randomised, double-blind, multicentre, parallel-group, prospective study comparing the pharmacokinetics, safety, and efficacy of CT-P13 and innovator infliximab in patients with ankylosing spondylitis: the PLANETAS study. Ann Rheum Dis. 2013;72(10):1605–12.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Park W, Yoo DH, Miranda P, Brzosko M, Wiland P, Gutierrez-Urena S, et al. Efficacy and safety of switching from reference infliximab to CT-P13 compared with maintenance of CT-P13 in ankylosing spondylitis: 102-week data from the PLANETAS extension study. Ann Rheum Dis. 2017;76(2):346–54.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Takeuchi T, Yamanaka H, Tanaka Y, Sakurai T, Saito K, Ohtsubo H, et al. Evaluation of the pharmacokinetic equivalence and 54-week efficacy and safety of CT-P13 and innovator infliximab in Japanese patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Mod Rheumatol. 2015;25(6):817–24.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Tweehuysen L, van den Bemt BJF, van Ingen IL, de Jong AJL, van der Laan WH, van den Hoogen FHJ, et al. Subjective complaints as the main reason for biosimilar discontinuation after open-label transition from reference infliximab to biosimilar infliximab. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2018;70(1):60–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Yoo DH, Hrycaj P, Miranda P, Ramiterre E, Piotrowski M, Shevchuk S, et al. 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(10):1613–20.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Yoo DH, Prodanovic N, Jaworski J, Miranda P, Ramiterre E, Lanzon A, et al. Efficacy and safety of CT-P13 (biosimilar infliximab) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: comparison between switching from reference infliximab to CT-P13 and continuing CT-P13 in the PLANETRA extension study. Ann Rheum Dis. 2017;76(2):355–63.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Cohen SB, Alten R, Kameda H, Hala T, Radominski SC, Rehman MI, et al. A randomized controlled trial comparing PF-06438179/GP1111 (an infliximab biosimilar) and infliximab reference product for treatment of moderate to severe active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate therapy. Arthritis Res Ther. 2018;20(1):155.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Park W, Bozic-Majstorovic L, Milakovic D, Berrocal Kasay A, El-Khouri EC, Irazoque-Palazuelos F, et al. Comparison of biosimilar CT-P10 and innovator rituximab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a randomized controlled Phase 3 trial. MAbs. 2018;10(6):934–43.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Park W, Suh CH, Shim SC, Molina FFC, Jeka S, Medina-Rodriguez FG, et al. Efficacy and safety of switching from innovator rituximab to biosimilar CT-P10 compared with continued treatment with CT-P10: results of a 56-week open-label study in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Biodrugs. 2017;31(4):369–77.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Yoo DH, Suh CH, Shim SC, Jeka S, Cons-Molina FF, Hrycaj P, et al. A multicentre randomised controlled trial to compare the pharmacokinetics, efficacy and safety of CT-P10 and innovator rituximab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2017;76(3):566–70.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Smolen JS, Cohen SB, Tony HP, Scheinberg M, Kivitz A, Balanescu A, et al. A randomised, double-blind trial to demonstrate bioequivalence of GP2013 and reference rituximab combined with methotrexate in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2017;76(9):1598–602.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Tony HP, Kruger K, Cohen SB, Schulze-Koops H, Kivitz AJ, Jeka S, et al. Brief report: safety and immunogenicity of rituximab biosimilar GP 2013 after switch from reference rituximab in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2019;71(1):88–94.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Cohen S, Emery P, Greenwald M, Yin D, Becker JC, Melia LA, et al. A phase I pharmacokinetics trial comparing PF-05280586 (a potential biosimilar) and rituximab in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2016;82(1):129–38.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Cohen SB, Burgos-Vargas R, Emery P, Jin B, Cronenberger C, Vazquez-Abad MD. Extension study of PF-05280586, a potential rituximab biosimilar, versus rituximab in subjects with active rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2018;70(11):1598–606.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Papp K, Bachelez H, Costanzo A, Foley P, Gooderham M, Kaur P, et al. Clinical similarity of biosimilar ABP 501 to adalimumab in the treatment of patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis: a randomized, double-blind, multicenter, phase III study. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017;76(6):1093–102.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Blauvelt A, Lacour JP, Fowler JF Jr, Weinberg JM, Gospodinov D, Schuck E, et al. Phase III randomized study of the proposed adalimumab biosimilar GP2017 in psoriasis: impact of multiple switches. Br J Dermatol. 2018;179(3):623–31.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Griffiths CEM, Thaci D, Gerdes S, Arenberger P, Pulka G, Kingo K, et al. The EGALITY study: a confirmatory, randomized, double-blind study comparing the efficacy, safety and immunogenicity of GP2015, a proposed etanercept biosimilar, vs. the originator product in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic plaque-type psoriasis. Br J Dermatol. 2017;176(4):928–38.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Ben-Horin S, Yavzori M, Benhar I, Fudim E, Picard O, Ungar B, et al. Cross-immunogenicity: antibodies to infliximab in Remicade-treated patients with IBD similarly recognise the biosimilar Remsima. Gut. 2016;65(7):1132–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Buer LC, Moum BA, Cvancarova M, Warren DJ, Medhus AW, Hoivik ML. Switching from Remicade(R) to Remsima(R) is well tolerated and feasible: a prospective open-label study. J Crohns Colitis. 2017;11(3):297–304.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Farkas K, Rutka M, Balint A, Nagy F, Bor R, Milassin A, et al. Efficacy of the new infliximab biosimilar CT-P13 induction therapy in Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis—experiences from a single center. Expert Opin Biol Ther. 2015;15(9):1257–62.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Farkas K, Rutka M, Golovics PA, Vegh Z, Lovasz BD, Nyari T, et al. Efficacy of infliximab biosimilar CT-P13 induction therapy on mucosal healing in ulcerative colitis. J Crohns Colitis. 2016;10(11):1273–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Gecse KB, Lovasz BD, Farkas K, Banai J, Bene L, Gasztonyi B, et al. Efficacy and safety of the biosimilar infliximab CT-P13 treatment in inflammatory bowel diseases: a prospective, multicentre, Nationwide cohort. J Crohns Colitis. 2016;10(2):133–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Jahnsen J, Detlie TE, Vatn S, Ricanek P. Biosimilar infliximab (CT-P13) in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease: a Norwegian observational study. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015;9(Suppl 1):45–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Jørgensen KK, Olsen IC, Goll GL, Lorentzen M, Bolstad N, Haavardsholm EA, et al. Switching from originator infliximab to biosimilar CT-P13 compared with maintained treatment with originator infliximab (NOR-SWITCH): a 52-week, randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority trial. Lancet. 2017;389(10086):2304–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Kolar M, Duricova D, Bortlik M, Hruba V, Machkova N, Mitrova K, et al. Infliximab biosimilar (Remsima) in therapy of inflammatory bowel diseases patients: experience from one tertiary inflammatory bowel diseases centre. Dig Dis. 2017;35(1–2):91–100.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Razanskaite V, Bettey M, Downey L, Wright J, Callaghan J, Rush M, et al. Biosimilar infliximab in inflammatory bowel disease: outcomes of a managed switching programme. J Crohns Colitis. 2017;11(6):690–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Smits LJ, Derikx LA, de Jong DJ, Boshuizen RS, van Esch AA, Drenth JP, et al. Clinical outcomes following a switch from Remicade(R) to the biosimilar CT-P13 in inflammatory bowel disease patients: a prospective observational cohort study. J Crohns Colitis. 2016;10(11):1287–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    CT-P13 (infliximab biosimilar). Briefing Document for the Arthritis Advisory Committee. 2016. https://www.fda.gov/downloads/advisorycommittees/committeesmeetingmaterials/drugs/arthritisadvisorycommittee/ucm484860.pdf. Accessed 9 Apr 2019.
  68. 68.
    CTP-10—a proposed biosimilar to Rituxan(R)—FDA Advisory Committee Meeting Briefing Document. 2018. https://www.fda.gov/downloads/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMaterials/Drugs/OncologicDrugsAdvisoryCommittee/UCM622647.pdf. Accessed 9 Apr 2019.
  69. 69.
    Papp K, Bachelez H, Costanzo A, Foley P, Gooderham M, Kaur P, et al. Clinical similarity of the biosimilar ABP 501 compared with adalimumab after single transition: long-term results from a randomized controlled, double-blind, 52-week, phase III trial in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. Br J Dermatol. 2017;177(6):1562–74.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Weinblatt ME, Baranauskaite A, Dokoupilova E, Zielinska A, Jaworski J, Racewicz A, et al. 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(6):832–40.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Gonczi L, Gecse KB, Vegh Z, Kurti Z, Rutka M, Farkas K, et al. Long-term efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of biosimilar infliximab after one year in a prospective nationwide cohort. Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2017;23(11):1908–15.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Gonczi L, Vegh Z, Golovics PA, Rutka M, Gecse KB, Bor R, et al. Prediction of short- and medium-term efficacy of biosimilar infliximab therapy do trough levels and antidrug antibody levels or clinical and biochemical markers play the more important role? J Crohns Colitis. 2017;11(6):697–705.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Høivik ML, Buer LCT, Cvancarova M, Warren DJ, Bolstad N, Moum BA, et al. Switching from originator to biosimilar infliximab—real world data of a prospective 18 months follow-up of a single-centre IBD population. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2018;53(6):692–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Park W, Yoo DH, Jaworski J, Brzezicki J, Gnylorybov A, Kadinov V, et al. 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;20(18):25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Smits LJT, Grelack A, Derikx L, de Jong DJ, van Esch AAJ, Boshuizen RS, et al. Long-term clinical outcomes after switching from Remicade((R)) to biosimilar CT-P13 in inflammatory bowel disease. Dig Dis Sci. 2017;62(11):3117–22.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Smits LJT, van Esch AAJ, Derikx L, Boshuizen R, de Jong DJ, Drenth JPH, et al. Drug survival and immunogenicity after switching from Remicade to biosimilar CT-P13 in inflammatory bowel disease patients: two-year follow-up of a prospective observational cohort study. Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2019;25(1):172–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Smolen JS, Choe JY, Prodanovic N, Niebrzydowski J, Staykov I, Dokoupilova E, et al. Comparing biosimilar SB2 with reference infliximab after 54 weeks of a double-blind trial: clinical, structural and safety results. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2017;56(10):1771–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Smolen JS, Choe JY, Prodanovic N, Niebrzydowski J, Staykov I, Dokoupilova E, et al. Safety, immunogenicity and efficacy after switching from reference infliximab to biosimilar SB2 compared with continuing reference infliximab and SB2 in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: results of a randomised, double-blind, phase III transition study. Ann Rheum Dis. 2018;77(2):234–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Emery P, Vencovsky J, Sylwestrzak A, Leszczynski P, Porawska W, Baranauskaite A, et al. 52-week results of the phase 3 randomized study comparing SB4 with reference etanercept in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2017;56(12):2093–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Emery P, Vencovsky J, Sylwestrzak A, Leszczynski P, Porawska W, Stasiuk B, et al. Long-term efficacy and safety in patients with rheumatoid arthritis continuing on SB4 or switching from reference etanercept to SB4. Ann Rheum Dis. 2017;76:1986–91.PubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Gerdes S, Thaçi D, Griffiths CEM, Arenberger P, Poetzl J, Wuerth G, et al. Multiple switches between GP2015, an etanercept biosimilar, with originator product do not impact efficacy, safety and immunogenicity in patients with chronic plaque-type psoriasis: 30-week results from the phase 3, confirmatory EGALITY study. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2018;32(3):420–7.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Yoo DH, Suh CH, Shim SC, Jeka S, Molina FFC, Hrycaj P, et al. Efficacy, safety and pharmacokinetics of up to two courses of the rituximab biosimilar CT-P10 versus innovator rituximab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: results up to week 72 of a phase i randomized controlled trial. Biodrugs. 2017;31(4):357–67.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Girolomoni G, Feldman SR, Emery P, Ghil J, Keum JW, Cheong SY, et al. Comparison of injection-site reactions between the etanercept biosimilar SB4 and the reference etanercept in patients with rheumatoid arthritis from a phase III study. Br J Dermatol. 2018;178(3):e215–6.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Reinisch W, Jahnsen J, Schreiber S, Danese S, Panes J, Balsa A, et al. Evaluation of the cross-reactivity of antidrug antibodies to CT-P13 and infliximab reference product (Remicade): an analysis using immunoassays tagged with both agents. Biodrugs. 2017;31(3):223–37.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Ruiz-Arguello MB, Maguregui A, Ruiz Del Agua A, Pascual-Salcedo D, Martinez-Feito A, Jurado T, et al. Antibodies to infliximab in Remicade-treated rheumatic patients show identical reactivity towards biosimilars. Ann Rheum Dis. 2016;75(9):1693–6.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Goncalves J, Santos M, Acurcio R, Iria I, Gouveia L, Matos Brito P, et al. Antigenic response to CT-P13 and infliximab originator in inflammatory bowel disease patients shows similar epitope recognition. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2018;48(5):507–22.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Benucci M, Gobbi FL, Bandinelli F, Damiani A, Infantino M, Grossi V, et al. Safety, efficacy and immunogenicity of switching from innovator to biosimilar infliximab in patients with spondyloarthritis: a 6-month real-life observational study. Immunol Res. 2017;65(1):419–22.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Strand V, Balsa A, Al-Saleh J, Barile-Fabris L, Horiuchi T, Takeuchi T, et al. Immunogenicity of biologics in chronic inflammatory diseases: a systematic review. Biodrugs. 2017;31(4):299–316.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Moots RJ, Curiale C, Petersel D, Rolland C, Jones H, Mysler E. Efficacy and safety outcomes for originator tnf inhibitors and biosimilars in rheumatoid arthritis and psoriasis trials: a systematic literature review. Biodrugs. 2018;32(3):193–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Kim JS, Kim SH, Kwon B, Hong S. Comparison of immunogenicity test methods used in clinical studies of infliximab and its biosimilar (CT-P13). Expert Rev Clin Immunol. 2015;11(Suppl 1):S33–41.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Talotta R, Berzi A, Doria A, Batticciotto A, Ditto MC, Atzeni F, et al. The immunogenicity of branded and biosimilar infliximab in rheumatoid arthritis according to Th9-related responses. Int J Mol Sci. 2017.  https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms18102127.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, Group C. CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMC Med. 2010;24(8):18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Immunology/RheumatologyStanford University School of MedicinePalo AltoUSA
  2. 2.iMed-Research Institute for Medicines, Faculdade de Farmácia daUniversidade de LisboaLisbonPortugal
  3. 3.Biomedicine DesignPfizerAndoverUSA
  4. 4.Inflammation and ImmunologyPfizerCollegevilleUSA
  5. 5.Institute of Cellular Medicine, Newcastle University and Musculoskeletal UnitNewcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustNewcastle upon TyneUK

Personalised recommendations