UNASSIGNED: Allergic asthma has a considerable burden on the quality of life. A significant portion of moderate-to-severe allergic asthma patients need omalizumab, an anti-immunoglobulin-E monoclonal antibody, as an add-on therapy. In this phase III clinical trial P043 (Zerafil®, CinnaGen, Iran) efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity were compared with Xolair® (the originator omalizumab). The primary outcome was the rate of protocol-defined asthma exacerbations.
UNASSIGNED: Exacerbation rates, Asthma Control Test (ACT) results, spirometry measurements, immunogenicity, and safety were evaluated. Each subject received either medication with a dose ranging from 150 to 375 mg based on pre-treatment serum total IgE level (IU/mL) and body weight (kg) every two or four weeks for a duration of 28 weeks.
UNASSIGNED: Exacerbation rates were 0.150 (CI: 0.079-0.220) in the P043 group, and 0.190 (CI: 0.110-0.270) in the omalizumab group (per-protocol). The least squares mean differences of predicted Forced Expiratory Volume in the First second (FEV1) were -2.51% (CI: -7.17-2.15, P=0.29) and -3.87% (CI: -8.79-1.04, P=0.12), pre- and post-bronchodilator use. The mean ± SD of ACT scores at the screening and the last visit were 10.62 ± 2.93 and 20.93 ± 4.26 in P043 and 11.09 ± 2.75 and 20.46 ± 5.11 in the omalizumab group. A total of 288 adverse events were reported for the 256 enrolled participants. Among all, \"dyspnea\" and \"headache\" were the most reported ones. The overall incidence of adverse events (P=0.62) and serious adverse events (P=0.07) had no significant differences between the two groups. None of the samples were positive for anti-drug antibodies.
UNASSIGNED: P043 was equivalent to omalizumab in the management of asthma in reduction of exacerbations. There was no significant difference in other efficacy and safety parameters.
UNASSIGNED: www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05813470) and www.IRCT.ir (IRCT20150303021315N20).

OBJECTIVE: MVASI (Amgen) and Zirabev (Pfizer) are two of the earliest bevacizumab biosimilars approved for the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We aimed to confirm and quantify the real-world cost-savings and cost-effectiveness of MVASI and Zirabev relative to originator bevacizumab for patients with mCRC.
METHODS: We conducted a population-based, retrospective cohort study in Ontario, Canada, where originator and biosimilar bevacizumab are universally publicly funded. All mCRC patients who received originator bevacizumab between January 2008 and August 2019 or biosimilar bevacizumab between August 2019 and March 2021 were propensity score-matched (1:4) to adjust for baseline differences. Total 1-year patient-level costs (CAD) and effects (life years (LY) and quality-adjusted life years (QALY)) were calculated from the public health payer\'s perspective. Primary outcomes included incremental net monetary benefit (INMB) and incremental net health benefit (INHB). Sensitivity analyses included a subgroup analysis by biosimilar type (MVASI/Zirabev) and a 2-year analysis.
RESULTS: The matched cohort included 747 biosimilar cases and 2,945 comparators. Bevacizumab biosimilars were associated with an incremental cost of -$6,379 (95%CI: -9,417, -3,537) (i.e., cost-saving) and incremental effect of 0.0 (95% CI: -0.02, 0.02) LY and -0.01 (95%CI: -0.03, 0) QALY gained. INMB and INHB estimates were $6,331 (95% CI: 6,245, 6,417) and 0.127 LY (95% CI: 0.125, 0.128), respectively, at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/LYG, with all estimates indicating the cost-effectiveness of biosimilar bevacizumab. Cost-effectiveness remained consistent across biosimilar brand subgroups and 2-year sensitivity analyses.
CONCLUSIONS: Bevacizumab biosimilars demonstrated real-world cost-savings while providing similar survival benefit as originator bevacizumab, confirming the initial expectations of their implementation and supporting health system sustainability.

This Summary of Research overviews the results of a study that looked at patient-reported outcomes in the VOLTAIRE-RA trial (NCT02137226), originally published in Rheumatology and Therapy. A biosimilar is a biologic medicine made to be very similar to the original biologic medicine (also known as the reference product). The VOLTAIRE-RA trial compared the efficacy and safety of an adalimumab biosimilar (Cyltezo®, adalimumab-admb) with the adalimumab reference product, Humira®, in people with rheumatoid arthritis. As part of the VOLTAIRE-RA study, participants took either adalimumab-adbm or adalimumab reference product for 24 weeks. Patient-reported outcomes were captured after 12 weeks and after 24 weeks of treatment to assess the effects of treatment on each participant\'s health-related quality of life. People with rheumatoid arthritis who were given adalimumab-adbm or adalimumab reference product experienced similar clinically meaningful improvements in their health-related quality of life after 12 weeks of treatment. A high proportion of people in this trial who were given adalimumab-adbm or adalimumab reference product reported greater improvement versus a reference US population matched by age and sex. This is notable, as it represents a treatment goal that was difficult to achieve in earlier rheumatoid arthritis trials of non-biologic treatments.

BACKGROUND: This post hoc analysis of VOLTAIRE-RA compared patient-reported outcomes, including health-related quality of life (HRQoL), in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) before and after treatment with biosimilar adalimumab-adbm or adalimumab reference product.
METHODS: HRQoL was assessed by 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36) Physical and Mental Component Summary (PCS and MCS, respectively) and domain scores at baseline and weeks 12/24. Results were considered clinically meaningful if improvements were greater than or equal to minimum clinically important differences (MCIDs) of 2.5 for PCS and MCS and 5.0 for domain scores. Comparisons with age- and sex-matched norms and treatment-associated changes in domain scores from baseline were quantified using spydergrams and the health utility SF-6D measure. All comparisons between treatment groups were descriptive in nature.
RESULTS: No differences in PCS scores were reported between treatment groups at baseline or weeks 12/24. MCS scores slightly favored the reference product group at baseline, and differences in scores at weeks 12/24 generally reflected those differences. Improvements in PCS scores greater than or equal to MCID at weeks 12/24 were reported by over 65% of patients in both treatment groups, while over 56% experienced improvements in MCS scores greater than or equal to MCID at weeks 12/24. Similar proportions receiving reference product and adalimumab-adbm reported scores greater than or equal to US age- and sex-matched normative values at week 24: 14-39% versus 15-36%, respectively, compared with baseline (1-17%).
CONCLUSIONS: In patients with moderate to severely active RA, adalimumab-adbm and adalimumab reference product were both associated with clinically meaningful improvements in SF-36 PCS, MCS, and domain scores that were highly similar at weeks 12/24. The high proportion of patients reporting scores greater than or equal to normative values in both treatment groups is notable, as this represents a treatment goal that was difficult to achieve in earlier RA trials. Video abstract available for this article.
BACKGROUND: VOLTAIRE-RA (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02137226; EudraCT number, 2012-002945-40). Video abstract (MP4 29755 KB).

A retrospective analysis comparing a teriparatide biosimilar (RGB-10) with reference teriparatide for osteoporosis treatment in postmenopausal women at high fracture risk found them to be therapeutically equivalent. Both provided significant improvements in lumber spine BMD, TBS, and other parameters of bone health, assessed using multiple diagnostic methods.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the therapeutic efficacy of a teriparatide biosimilar (RGB-10) with reference teriparatide for the treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women at very high fracture risk.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 25 postmenopausal female patients treated for osteoporosis with RGB-10 for 24 months and a matched cohort of 25 patients treated with reference teriparatide. The following outcomes were assessed at baseline, 12 and 24 months: bone mineral density (BMD) at the lumbar spine, femoral neck and total hip using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and integral, trabecular and cortical volumetric and surface BMD using 3D-SHAPER® imaging, trabecular bone score (TBS), quantitative ultrasound (QUS) measurements, and high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography (HRpQCT) imaging of the radius and tibia.
RESULTS: No significant differences were observed between treatment groups in any of the measured parameters of BMD or bone health at baseline as well as in any timepoint when assessed using these various diagnostic methods. Both compounds provided equivalent significant improvements from baseline in measures of osteoporosis and fracture risk.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of the analysis demonstrate the therapeutic equivalence of the teriparatide biosimilar (RGB-10) to reference teriparatide for the treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women at very high risk of fracture.

Breast cancer remains the most common cancer in women worldwide. Among women with breast cancer, brain metastases are very prevalent among HER2-positive and affect those in the advanced stages of the disease. Various factors, including molecular subtypes, performance status, extracranial disease status, leptomeningeal metastasis, and the number of lesions, significantly influence the prognosis of patients with brain metastases from breast cancer (BCBrM). Understanding and addressing the specific risks associated with different breast cancer subtypes is crucial for developing tailored and effective medical treatments. This report presents a case of a breast cancer patient with recurrent disease and brain metastases who achieved long-term survival following a treatment regimen that included radiotherapy and a T-DM1 biosimilar.

This 78-week (18-month) study conducted in 479 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis evaluated the efficacy, pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, safety, and immunogenicity of candidate biosimilar CT-P41 relative to US reference denosumab. CT-P41 had equivalent efficacy and pharmacodynamics to US-denosumab, with similar pharmacokinetics and comparable safety and immunogenicity profiles.
OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate equivalence of candidate biosimilar CT-P41 and US reference denosumab (US-denosumab) in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.
METHODS: This 78-week (18-month), double-blind, randomized, active-controlled Phase 3 study (NCT04757376) comprised two treatment periods (TPs). In TPI, patients (N = 479) were randomized 1:1 to 60 mg subcutaneous CT-P41 or US-denosumab. At Week 52, those who had received CT-P41 in TPI continued to do so. Those who had received US-denosumab were randomized (1:1) to continue treatment or switch to CT-P41 in TPII. The primary efficacy endpoint was percent change from baseline in lumbar spine bone mineral density at Week 52. Efficacy equivalence was concluded if associated 95% confidence intervals (CI) for least squares (LS) mean group differences fell within ± 1.503%. The primary pharmacodynamic (PD) endpoint was area under the effect curve for serum carboxy-terminal cross-linking telopeptide of type I collagen through the first 26 weeks, with an equivalence margin of 80-125% (for 95% CIs associated with geometric LS mean ratios).
RESULTS: Equivalence was demonstrated for CT-P41 and US-denosumab with respect to primary efficacy (LS mean difference [95% CI]: - 0.139 [- 0.826, 0.548] in the full analysis set and - 0.280 [- 0.973, 0.414] in the per-protocol set) and PD (geometric LS mean ratio [95% CI]: 94.94 [90.75, 99.32]) endpoints. Secondary efficacy, PD, pharmacokinetics, and safety results were comparable among all groups up to Week 78, including after transitioning to CT-P41 from US-denosumab.
CONCLUSIONS: CT-P41 was equivalent to US-denosumab in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis, with respect to primary efficacy and PD endpoints.

The mechanisms of mAb-induced ADCC have been well established. However, the ADCC bioassays used to quantify mAb-induced ADCC require continued development/refinement to properly assess and compare the potency of newly developed therapeutic mAbs and biosimilars to meet regulatory requirements. We used trastuzumab and a lactate dehydrogenase (LDH)-based ADCC bioassay as a model to define critical parameters of the ADCC bioassay, describing how several bioassay parameters, including preparation of effector cells, E/T ratio, target cell selection, bioassay media components, and treatment time can influence the data quality of the ADCC activity. We confirm that a 4 to 24 h recovery cultivation is required to restore peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) and natural killer (NK) cell activity toward ADCC when using cryopreserved PBMCs. Furthermore, we delineated the cellular mechanisms underlying the restored ADCC activity following the recovery cultivation. We observed that CD69, an early marker of NK cell activation, was upregulated and a new subset CD56dim/CD16dim population was dramatically increased in the recovered NK cells, which led to an increase in expression and secretion of perforin, granzyme B, and cytokine production. This study provides comprehensive technical insights into ADCC bioassay optimization to inform trastuzumab biosimilar development. The knowledge gained from this study can also be leveraged to guide bioassay development for therapeutic mAbs with ADCC as the primary mechanism of action.

Continuous manufacturing enables high volumetric productivities of biologics such as monoclonal antibodies. However, it is challenging to maintain both high viable cell densities and productivities at the same time for long culture durations. One of the key controls in a perfusion process is the perfusion rate which determines the nutrient availability and potentially controls the cell metabolism. Cell Specific Perfusion Rate (CSPR) is a feed rate proportional to the viable cell density while Biomass Specific Perfusion Rate (BSPR) is a feed rate proportional to the biomass (cell volume multiply by cell density). In this study, perfusion cultures were run at three BSPRs in the production phase. Low BSPR favored a growth arresting state that led to gradual increase in cell volume, which in turn led to an increase in net perfusion rate proportional to the increase in cell volume. Consequently, at low BSPR, while the cell viability and cell density decreased, high specific productivity of 55 pg per cell per day was achieved. In contrast, the specific productivity was lower in bioreactors operating at a high BSPR. The ability to modulate the cell metabolism by using BSPR was confirmed when the specific productivity increased after lowering the BSPR in one of the bioreactors that was initially operating at a high BSPR. This study demonstrated that BSPR significantly influenced cell growth, metabolism, and productivity in cultures with variable cell volumes.

BACKGROUND: SB11 (Byooviz™; Samsung Bioepis Co., Ltd.) is a ranibizumab (Lucentis®; Genentech, Inc.) biosimilar targeting vascular endothelial growth factor A for the treatment of retinal diseases. The pre-filled syringe (PFS) presentation of SB11 offers an alternative administration method to the vial, with the potential for enhanced safety and efficient syringe preparation. The objective of this study was to assess the ability of healthcare professionals (HCPs) to follow the instructions for use to prepare and administer SB11 PFS intravitreal (IVT) injections to patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) or macular edema secondary to retinal vein occlusion (RVO).
METHODS: This study was an open-label, single-arm, single-dose clinical study to evaluate the usability of the SB11 PFS in patients with nAMD or macular edema secondary to RVO. Four HCPs prepared and administered 0.5 mg SB11 PFS IVT injections to 34 patients. Product use task completion (12 tasks in total) was assessed by independent observers. Safety was assessed up to 7 days after injection of the investigational product.
RESULTS: A total of 34 patients were enrolled and completed the study. All 12 tasks were successfully completed in 34 (100%) patients without a use-related failure. Most patients (32 patients, 94.1%) experienced no adverse events (AEs), whereas 2 (5.9%) patients experienced three treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) which were mild to moderate in severity. There were no severe or serious TEAEs reported during the study.
CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that HCPs were able to successfully prepare and administer the SB11 PFS via IVT injection. No unexpected safety issues were identified. The SB11 PFS is a promising alternative for therapeutic administration of SB11 in patients with retinal disease.
BACKGROUND: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT06176963; EudraCT number 2021-003566-12.