Infliximab biosimilar-to-biosimilar switching in patients with inflammatory rheumatic disease: clinical outcomes in real-world patients from the DANBIO registry

Objective Successful uptake of biosimilars in rheumatology is limited by lack of real-world evidence regarding effectiveness of biosimilar-to-biosimilar switching. We investigated infliximab biosimilars CT-P13-to-GP1111 switching among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and axial spondyloarthritis (AxSpA). Methods Observational cohort study from the DANBIO registry. Patients were classified as originator-naïve or originator-experienced. Retention rates of 1-year GP1111 treatment were explored (Kaplan-Meier). We identified baseline factors (at the time of switch) associated with withdrawal of GP1111 (multivariable Cox-regression analyses with HRs including originator treatment history). Changes in subjective and objective measures of disease activity 4 months before and after the switch were assessed in individual patients. Results Of 1605 patients (685 RA, 314 PsA and 606 AxSpA, median disease duration was 9 years, 37% in Clinical Disease Activity Index/Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score remission), 1171 were originator-naïve. Retention rates at 1-year were 83% (95% CI: 81% to 85%) and 92% (95% CI: 90% to 95%) for the originator-naïve and originator-experienced, respectively. GP1111 retention rates were higher in originator-experienced compared to originator-naïve with RA (HR=0.4 (95% CI: 0.2 to 0.7)) and PsA (HR=0.2 (95% CI: 0.1 to 0.8)), but not significantly for AxSpA: HR=0.6 (95% CI: 0.3 to 1.2). Lower disease activity was associated with higher retention. Changes in disease activity preswitch and postswitch were close to zero. Conclusion This real-world observational study of more than 1600 patients with inflammatory arthritis showed high 1-year retention following a nationwide infliximab biosimilar-to-biosimilar switch. Retention was higher in originator-experienced and in patients with low disease activity, suggesting outcomes to be affected by patient-related rather than drug-related factors.

[1]  J. Harvey,et al.  PMO-20 The IBD biosimilar to biosimilar switching study (iBiSS) , 2021, Posters.

[2]  L. Peyrin-Biroulet,et al.  Biosimilar-to-Biosimilar Switching: What is the Rationale and Current Experience? , 2021, Drugs.

[3]  C. Girelli,et al.  Safety and clinical efficacy of the double switch from originator infliximab to biosimilars CT‐P13 and SB2 in patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (SCESICS): A multicenter cohort study , 2021, Clinical and translational science.

[4]  C. Agboton,et al.  Biosimilars in chronic inflammatory diseases: facts and remaining questions 5 years after their introduction in Europe , 2021, Expert opinion on biological therapy.

[5]  G. D'Haens,et al.  Multiple Switches From the Originator Infliximab to Biosimilars Is Effective and Safe in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Prospective Multicenter Cohort Study , 2021, Inflammatory bowel diseases.

[6]  A. Loft,et al.  Comparative effectiveness of two adalimumab biosimilars in 1318 real-world patients with inflammatory rheumatic disease mandated to switch from originator adalimumab: nationwide observational study emulating a randomised clinical trial , 2021, Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases.

[7]  D. Xie,et al.  The Efficacy and Safety of Switching From Originator Infliximab to Single or Double Switch Biosimilar Among a Nationwide Cohort of Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients. , 2021, Crohn's & colitis 360.

[8]  A. Amiot,et al.  Outcomes after double switching from originator Infliximab to biosimilar CT‐P13 and biosimilar SB2 in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a 12‐month prospective cohort study , 2021, Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics.

[9]  J. Orazem,et al.  Interchangeability of Biosimilars: What Level of Clinical Evidence is Needed to Support the Interchangeability Designation in the United States? , 2020, BioDrugs.

[10]  B. Feagan,et al.  The Challenges of Switching Therapies in an Evolving Multiple Biosimilars Landscape: A Narrative Review of Current Evidence , 2020, Advances in Therapy.

[11]  P. Gisondi,et al.  Switching from one infliximab biosimilar (CT‐P13) to another infliximab biosimilar (SB2) in patients with chronic plaque psoriasis , 2020, The British journal of dermatology.

[12]  M. Dougados,et al.  Effects of successive switches to different biosimilars infliximab on immunogenicity in chronic inflammatory diseases in daily clinical practice. , 2020, Seminars in arthritis and rheumatism.

[13]  M. Morino,et al.  Effectiveness and safety of adalimumab biosimilar ABP 501 in Crohn's disease: an observational study. , 2020, Revista espanola de enfermedades digestivas : organo oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Patologia Digestiva.

[14]  A. Chandra,et al.  Efficacy And Safety Of Adalimumab Biosimilar (Exemptia) In Moderate-To-Severe Steroid-Refractory Ulcerative Colitis Patients: Real-Life Outcomes In Resource-Constrained Setting At 24-Weeks Follow-Up , 2019, Biologics : targets & therapy.

[15]  F. Benedetti,et al.  Era of biosimilars in rheumatology: reshaping the healthcare environment , 2019, RMD Open.

[16]  V. Tseluyko,et al.  Randomised, double-blind, phase III study comparing the infliximab biosimilar, PF-06438179/GP1111, with reference infliximab: efficacy, safety and immunogenicity from week 30 to week 54 , 2019, RMD Open.

[17]  A. Loft,et al.  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 , 2018, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[18]  S. Teerenstra,et al.  Open‐Label, Non‐Mandatory Transitioning From Originator Etanercept to Biosimilar SB4 , 2018, Arthritis & rheumatology.

[19]  S. Provan,et al.  Biological treatment in ankylosing spondylitis in the Nordic countries during 2010–2016: a collaboration between five biological registries , 2018, Scandinavian journal of rheumatology.

[20]  Stanley B. Cohen,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 , 2018, Arthritis Research & Therapy.

[21]  F. Hoogen,et al.  Subjective Complaints as the Main Reason for Biosimilar Discontinuation After Open‐Label Transition From Reference Infliximab to Biosimilar Infliximab , 2018, Arthritis & rheumatology.

[22]  F. Breedveld,et al.  Consensus-based recommendations for the use of biosimilars to treat rheumatological diseases , 2017, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[23]  A. Loft,et al.  Validity and completeness of rheumatoid arthritis diagnoses in the nationwide DANBIO clinical register and the Danish National Patient Registry , 2017, Clinical epidemiology.

[24]  A. Skapenko,et al.  Biosimilars in rheumatology: A review of the evidence and their place in the treatment algorithm , 2017, Rheumatology.

[25]  T. Uhlig,et al.  Reviewing the evidence for biosimilars: key insights, lessons learned and future horizons , 2017, Rheumatology.

[26]  Inge Christoffer Olsen,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 , 2017, The Lancet.

[27]  A. Loft,et al.  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 , 2017, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[28]  P. Miranda,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 , 2016, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[29]  M. Hetland,et al.  The Danish nationwide clinical register for patients with rheumatoid arthritis: DANBIO , 2016, Clinical epidemiology.

[30]  H. Sayles,et al.  Generalizability of Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis in Biologic Agent Clinical Trials , 2016, Arthritis care & research.

[31]  Xin Wang,et al.  The design of clinical trials to support the switching and alternation of biosimilars , 2016, Expert opinion on biological therapy.

[32]  J. Goncalves,et al.  Pharmacoeconomics of Biosimilars: What Is There to Gain from Them? , 2016, Current Rheumatology Reports.

[33]  S. Navarra,et al.  A phase III randomized study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of CT-P13 compared with reference infliximab in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis: 54-week results from the PLANETRA study , 2016, Arthritis Research & Therapy.

[34]  Sigrun Alba Johannesdottir Schmidt,et al.  The Danish National Patient Registry: a review of content, data quality, and research potential , 2015, Clinical epidemiology.

[35]  Henrik Toft Sørensen,et al.  The Danish Civil Registration System as a tool in epidemiology , 2014, European Journal of Epidemiology.

[36]  A. Boonen,et al.  Inequities in access to biologic and synthetic DMARDs across 46 European countries , 2013, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.