A phase III randomised, double-blind, parallel-group study comparing SB4 with etanercept reference product in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate therapy

Objectives To compare the efficacy and safety of SB4 (an etanercept biosimilar) with reference product etanercept (ETN) in patients with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) despite methotrexate (MTX) therapy. Methods This is a phase III, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, multicentre study with a 24-week primary endpoint. Patients with moderate to severe RA despite MTX treatment were randomised to receive weekly dose of 50 mg of subcutaneous SB4 or ETN. The primary endpoint was the American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response at week 24. Other efficacy endpoints as well as safety, immunogenicity and pharmacokinetic parameters were also measured. Results 596 patients were randomised to either SB4 (N=299) or ETN (N=297). The ACR20 response rate at week 24 in the per-protocol set was 78.1% for SB4 and 80.3% for ETN. The 95% CI of the adjusted treatment difference was −9.41% to 4.98%, which is completely contained within the predefined equivalence margin of −15% to 15%, indicating therapeutic equivalence between SB4 and ETN. Other efficacy endpoints and pharmacokinetic endpoints were comparable. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was comparable (55.2% vs 58.2%), and the incidence of antidrug antibody development up to week 24 was lower in SB4 compared with ETN (0.7% vs 13.1%). Conclusions SB4 was shown to be equivalent with ETN in terms of efficacy at week 24. SB4 was well tolerated with a lower immunogenicity profile. The safety profile of SB4 was comparable with that of ETN. Trial registration numbers NCT01895309, EudraCT 2012-005026-30.

[1]  R. Tomashevskyi,et al.  Kharkiv Medical Academy of Postgraduate Education, Kharkiv, Ukraine. OPPORTUNITY AND PLANNING BIM-ANALYSIS FOR MONITORING BLOOD , 2018 .

[2]  J. Kang,et al.  SAT0176 A Phase I Pharmacokinetic Study Comparing SB4, An Etanercept Biosimilar, and Etanercept Reference Product (Enbrel®) in Healthy Male Subjects , 2015 .

[3]  P. Emery,et al.  Sustained remission with etanercept tapering in early rheumatoid arthritis. , 2014, The New England journal of medicine.

[4]  A. Chopra,et al.  A phase 3, randomized, bouble-blind, active comparator study of the efficacy and safety of bBow015, a biosimilar infliximab, in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis on stable methotrexate doses , 2014 .

[5]  S. Chandrashekara,et al.  OP0012 A Phase 3, Randomized, Double-Blind, Active Comparator Study of the Efficacy and Safety of Bow015, A Biosimilar Infliximab, in Patients with Active Rheumatoid Arthritis on Stable Methotrexate Doses , 2014 .

[6]  S. Bae,et al.  OP0011 A Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase 3 Equivalence TRIAL Comparing the Etanercept Biosimilar, Hd203, with Enbrel®, in Combination with Methotrexate (MTX) in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) , 2014 .

[7]  R. Reeve,et al.  Rheumatoid Arthritis Disease Progression Modeling , 2013, Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science.

[8]  U. Müller-Ladner,et al.  FRI0143 A randomized, double-blind, phase 3 study demonstrates clinical equivalence of CT-P13 to infliximab when co-administered with methotrexate in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis , 2013 .

[9]  V. Strand,et al.  The role of biosimilars in the treatment of rheumatic diseases , 2012, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[10]  M. Suarez‐Almazor,et al.  Risk of malignancies in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with biologic therapy: a meta-analysis. , 2012, JAMA.

[11]  B. Dijkmans,et al.  Patients non-responding to etanercept obtain lower etanercept concentrations compared to responding patients , 2013 .

[12]  J. Kay Biosimilars: a regulatory perspective from America , 2011, Arthritis research & therapy.

[13]  S. Singh,et al.  Impact of product-related factors on immunogenicity of biotherapeutics. , 2011, Journal of pharmaceutical sciences.

[14]  Medicinos Akademija,et al.  LITHUANIAN UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES , 2011 .

[15]  GUIDELINE ON SIMILAR BIOLOGICAL MEDICINAL PRODUCTS CONTAINING BIOTECHNOLOGY-DERIVED PROTEINS AS ACTIVE SUBSTANCE: NON-CLINICAL AND CLINICAL ISSUES , 2011 .

[16]  Draft Guidance Guidance for Industry Non-Inferiority Clinical Trials , 2010 .

[17]  Juan Li,et al.  Patients with Moderate Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) Achieve Better Disease Activity States with Etanercept Treatment Than Patients with Severe RA , 2009, The Journal of Rheumatology.

[18]  P. Geusens,et al.  Efficacy, safety and patient-reported outcomes of combination etanercept and sulfasalazine versus etanercept alone in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a double-blind randomised 2-year study , 2008, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[19]  F. Breedveld,et al.  Comparison of methotrexate monotherapy with a combination of methotrexate and etanercept in active, early, moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (COMET): a randomised, double-blind, parallel treatment trial , 2008, The Lancet.

[20]  A. Rosenberg,et al.  Effects of protein aggregates: An immunologic perspective , 2006, The AAPS Journal.

[21]  P. Peloso,et al.  The immunogenicity, safety, and efficacy of etanercept liquid administered once weekly in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. , 2007, Clinical and experimental rheumatology.

[22]  B. Fuchs,et al.  Use of etanercept in the treatment of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis. , 2006, Reviews on recent clinical trials.

[23]  P. Geusens,et al.  Etanercept and sulfasalazine, alone and combined, in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis despite receiving sulfasalazine: a double-blind comparison , 2006, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[24]  Harald Enzmann,et al.  Committee for medicinal products for human use (CHMP) guideline on the choice of the non‐inferiority margin , 2022 .

[25]  Huub Schellekens,et al.  Structure-Immunogenicity Relationships of Therapeutic Proteins , 2004, Pharmaceutical Research.

[26]  L. Klareskog,et al.  Therapeutic effect of the combination of etanercept and methotrexate compared with each treatment alone in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: double-blind randomised controlled trial , 2004, The Lancet.

[27]  J. Kremer,et al.  Once-weekly administration of 50 mg etanercept in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis: results of a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. , 2004, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[28]  J. Cather,et al.  Etanercept: An overview. , 2003, Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.

[29]  R. Halder,et al.  Ethnic Hair & Skin: What is the State of the Science?Introduction☆☆☆ , 2003 .

[30]  Richard W. Martin,et al.  Etanercept versus methotrexate in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis: two-year radiographic and clinical outcomes. , 2002, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[31]  C. Ritchlin,et al.  Clinical, histological, and immunophenotypic characteristics of injection site reactions associated with etanercept: a recombinant tumor necrosis factor alpha receptor: Fc fusion protein. , 2001, Archives of dermatology.

[32]  Richard W. Martin,et al.  A comparison of etanercept and methotrexate in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis. , 2000, The New England journal of medicine.

[33]  D. Furst,et al.  Etanercept Therapy in Rheumatoid Arthritis , 1999, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[34]  J. Kremer,et al.  A trial of etanercept, a recombinant tumor necrosis factor receptor:Fc fusion protein, in patients with rheumatoid arthritis receiving methotrexate. , 1999, The New England journal of medicine.

[35]  D. Furst,et al.  Etanercept therapy in rheumatoid arthritis. A randomized, controlled trial. , 1999, Annals of internal medicine.

[36]  S. Dahl,et al.  Recombinant Human Tumor Necrosis Factor Receptor (P75) Fc Fusion Protein (Tnfr: Fc) in Rheumatoid Arthritis , 1997, The Annals of pharmacotherapy.

[37]  G. Kersley European League Against Rheumatism , 1951 .