Project description:BackgroundRegulatory approval for a biosimilar product is provided on the basis of its comparability to an originator product. A thorough physicochemical and functional comparability exercise is a key element in demonstrating biosimilarity. Here we report the characterization of a proposed biosimilar rituximab (GP2013) and originator rituximab.ObjectiveTo compare GP2013 with originator rituximab using an extensive array of routine analytical and extended characterization methods.MethodsPrimary and higher order protein structures were analyzed using a variety of methods that included high-performance liquid chromatography electrospray ionization mass spectrometry (HPLC-ESI-MS), peptide mapping with UV and MS detection, circular dichroism (CD), Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy, hydrogen deuterium exchange (HDX) MS, 1D (1)H nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy, X-ray crystallography and differential scanning calorimetry (DSC). Charge and amino acid modifications were assessed using cation exchange chromatography (CEX) and peptide mapping using reversed-phase (RP) HPLC. Boronate affinity chromatography was used to determine the relative amount of glycation. Glycans were identified and quantified after 2-aminobenzamide (2-AB) labeling and separation using normal phase HPLC with fluorescence and MS detection, respectively. Glycan site occupancy was determined using reducing capillary electrophoresis with sodium dodecyl sulfate (CE-SDS). Size heterogeneity was determined using reducing and non-reducing CE-SDS, size exclusion chromatography (SEC) and asymmetric flow field flow fractionation (AF4). Biological characterization included a series of bioassays (in vitro target binding, antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity [ADCC], complement-dependent cytotoxicity [CDC] and apoptosis) and surface plasmon resonance (SPR) Fc receptor binding assays.ResultsIntact mass analysis of GP2013 and the heavy and light chains using RP HPLC-ESI-MS revealed the expected molecular mass of rituximab. The amino acid sequence was shown to be identical between GP2013 and the originator rituximab. Further sequence confirmation using RP-HPLC-UV/MS peptide mapping showed non-distinguishable chromatograms for Lys-C digested GP2013 and originator rituximab. The higher order structure of GP2013 was shown to be indistinguishable from originator rituximab using a large panel of redundant and orthogonal methods. GP2013 and originator rituximab were comparable with regard to charge variants, specific amino acid modifications and the glycan pattern. GP2013 was also shown to have similar purity, aggregate and particle levels when compared with the originator. Functionally, and by using a comprehensive set of bioassays and binding assays covering a broad range of rituximab's functional activities, GP2013 could not be distinguished from originator rituximab.ConclusionGP2013 was shown to be physicochemically highly similar to originator rituximab at the level of primary and higher order structure, post-translational modifications and size variants. An extensive functional characterization package indicated that GP2013 has the same biological properties as originator rituximab.
Project description:In this clinical trial, we demonstrate that ultrarapid fast infusion of rituximab (Truxima) in 30 min with oral premedication is feasible and secure for patients, and reduce the day-care hospital stays.
Project description:BackgroundInfusion-related reactions (IRRs) are the most common adverse event (AE) associated with infusion of rituximab, an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody.ObjectiveOur objective was to evaluate the impact of dosing/infusion patterns and certain baseline characteristics on IRR occurrence during the first rituximab infusion administered as the biosimilar PF-05280586 (RTX-PF) or reference rituximab sourced from the EU (RTX-EU, MabThera®) in patients with CD20+ low-tumor-burden follicular lymphoma.Patients and methodsRituximab (RTX-PF, n=196; RTX-EU, n=198) was administered (375 mg/m2) on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 (one cycle), with a follow-up period through 52 weeks. The relationships between infusion rate, drug exposure, and IRR incidence were assessed by logistic regression analysis and pharmacokinetic modeling and simulation. Baseline CD20 level, antidrug antibody (ADA) status, and tumor burden according to IRR occurrence (yes/no) were compared descriptively.ResultsMedian rituximab infusion duration on day 1 was 3.50 h for each of the two groups. There was a positive correlation between infusion rate and all-grade IRRs occurring within 24 h after infusion (p < 0.0001). Patients who developed IRRs had a higher median baseline CD20+ level. IRR incidence was unaffected by baseline ADA status. Drug exposure did not predict IRR incidence. Baseline tumor burden was similar between patients with and without IRRs.ConclusionsResults of this analysis provide a better understanding of IRRs after the first rituximab (RTX-PF or RTX-EU) infusion and demonstrate a potential correlation of infusion rate and other factors with IRR at the individual and population levels. Infusion-rate escalation steps continue to be needed to manage IRRs.Trial registration (date of registration)ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02213263 (11 August 2014); and EudraCT: 2014-000132-41 (10 October 2014).
Project description:OBJECTIVE:This extension study provided continued treatment to subjects with active rheumatoid arthritis who had participated for ≥16 weeks in a pharmacokinetic similarity study of PF-05280586 (potential rituximab biosimilar). Objectives were to evaluate overall pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, immunogenicity, safety, and tolerability of PF-05280586 after transition from rituximab reference products to PF-05280586, and follow-up of biomarker and efficacy assessments. METHODS:Subjects were offered ≤3 additional courses of treatment of PF-05280586, with or without a single transition from rituximab in Europe (rituximab-EU; MabThera) or the US (rituximab-US; Rituxan) to PF-05280586. Each course comprised 2 intravenous infusions (1,000 mg on days 1 and 15, separated by 24 weeks [± 8 weeks]). RESULTS:Of 220 subjects in the parent study, 185 were randomized and included in this study. There were no notable differences in drug concentrations between groups or across courses, with little variation in depletion of CD19+ B cells between groups, and no apparent relationship between infusion-related reactions and antidrug antibodies with or without single transition from rituximab reference products to PF-05280586. Long-term safety and tolerability of PF-05280586 was acceptable in all groups for up to 96 weeks, with a low incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events independent of single drug transition. The percentage of subjects with a low disease activity score and disease activity score remission was similar across groups for all time points, and responses were sustained until end of study. CONCLUSION:This study demonstrated acceptable safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity, with or without single transition from rituximab reference products to PF-05280586, without increased immunogenicity on single transition.
Project description:PurposeThere has been no extensive study to compare the efficacy between rituximab originator (Mabthera®) and its biosimilar (Truxima®) for microscopic polyangiitis (MPA) and granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA). Here, we investigated the clinical effects of rituximab on poor outcomes of MPA and GPA in Korean patients, and compared those between Mabthera® and Truxima®.Materials and methodsWe retrospectively reviewed the medical records of a total of 139 patients, including 97 MPA patients and 42 GPA patients. At diagnosis, antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody positivity and comorbidities were assessed. During follow-up, all-cause mortality, relapse, end-stage renal disease, cerebrovascular accident and acute coronary syndrome were evaluated as poor outcomes. In this study, rituximab was used as either Mabthera® or Truxima®.ResultsThe median age at diagnosis was 60.1 years and 46 patients were men (97 MPA and 42 GPA patients). Among poor outcomes, patients receiving rituximab exhibited a significantly lower cumulative relapse-free survival rate compared to those not receiving rituximab (p=0.002). Nevertheless, rituximab use did not make any difference in other poor outcomes of MPA and GPA except for relapse, which might be a rebuttal to the fact that rituximab use after relapse eventually led to better prognosis. There were no significant differences in variables at diagnosis and during follow-up between patients receiving Mabthera® and those receiving Truxima®. Patients receiving Truxima® exhibited a similar pattern of the cumulative survival rates of each poor outcome to those receiving Mabthera®.ConclusionTruxima® prevents poor outcomes of MPA and GPA as effectively as does Mabthera®.
Project description:IntroductionNew biosimilars of monoclonal antibodies are anticipated to bring significant cost savings and increase access to treatment. The rituximab biosimilar CT-P10 has recently been approved in Europe in all indications held by reference rituximab (RTX), including rheumatoid arthritis, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, and chronic lymphocytic leukemia. We analyzed the budgetary impact of the introduction of CT-P10 into the European Union (EU) for use in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and cancer diagnoses, using a budget impact analysis model.MethodsThe model used a base case scenario in which the 1-year uptake of CT-P10 was estimated at 30%, and the cost of CT-P10 was assumed to be 70% of the cost of RTX. A second 1-year scenario was also modeled, in which the market share of CT-P10 was assumed to be 50% (scenario 2). Finally, 3-year time horizon outcomes were calculated, in which the market share of CT-P10 was assumed to be 30%, 40%, and 50% in the first, second, and third years, respectively.ResultsIn the base case scenario, the introduction of CT-P10 was associated with projected savings of €90.04 million in the first year, which would allow 7531 additional patients to access rituximab treatment. This was equivalent to a 6.4% increase in the number of rituximab-treated patients. In scenario 2, budget savings were €150.10 million, with a total of 12,551 additional patients able to access rituximab, equivalent to a 10.7% increase. Over a 3-year time horizon, projected budget savings were approximately €570 million, equating to 47,695 additional patients able to access rituximab.ConclusionsThe model predicted that the introduction of CT-P10 in the EU will be associated with significant budget savings, the reallocation of which will enable many more patients to access rituximab treatment. This is likely to have a significant impact on health gains at patient and societal levels.FundingCELLTRION Healthcare Co., Ltd. sponsored the development and analysis of the budget impact analysis model.
Project description:BackgroundRituximab is an induction immunosuppressant essential for ABO-incompatible kidney transplantation (ABOi KT). However, studies on its dosing, which differs among countries and transplant centers, are lacking. Therefore, we retrospectively investigated the effectiveness of the induction dose of rituximab against patient mortality, graft failure, and adverse events.MethodsWe included the studies referring to at least 2 of eligible induction doses (200 mg, 200-500 mg, or 500 mg) of rituximab during ABOi KT and relevant outcomes such as patient survival, graft failure, and bacterial and viral infections. We performed direct and indirect network meta-analyses using Bayesian models and ranked different rituximab doses using generation mixed treatment comparison. Publications were retrieved using CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded databases from 1970 to February 2020 and analyzed. The GRADE of network meta-analysis approach specified 4 levels of certainty for a given result: high, moderate, low, and very low.ResultsAmong the 4256 patients from 21 trials, glomerular filtration rate, graft loss, antibody-mediated rejection, T-cell mediated rejection, fungal infection, bacterial infection, and CMV infection did not differ among ABOi groups treated with different rituximab doses. The effect on mortality was significantly higher in rituximab 200 to 500 mg, and rituximab 500 mg groups (odds ratios [OR] 3.5, 95% CrI: 1.3-9.8, and OR 3.0, 95% CrI 1.1-9.8), but not in rituximab 20 mg group (OR 0.45, 95% CrI 0.036-2.5). The incidence of BK virus was significantly lower in the rituximab 200-mg group than in the other groups.DiscussionIn ABO-incompatible kidney transplantation, low-dose rituximab is more efficacious than higher doses and reduces serious infection risks. Additional randomized controlled trials might be needed to confirm these findings due to small sample size.
Project description:AimsTo evaluate potential differences between PF-05280586 and rituximab sourced from the European Union (rituximab-EU) and USA (rituximab-US) in clinical response (Disease Activity Score in 28 Joints [DAS28] and American College of Rheumatology [ACR] criteria), as part of the overall biosimilarity assessment of PF-05280586.MethodsA randomised, double-blind, pharmacokinetic similarity trial was conducted in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis refractory to anti-tumour necrosis factor therapy on a background of methotrexate. Patients were treated with 1000 mg of PF-05280586, rituximab-EU or rituximab-US on days 1 and 15 and followed over 24 weeks for pharmacokinetic, clinical response and safety assessments. Key secondary end points were the areas under effect curves for DAS28 and ACR responses. Mean differences in areas under effect curves were compared against respective reference ranges established by observed rituximab-EU and rituximab-US responses using longitudinal nonlinear mixed effects models.ResultsThe analysis included 214 patients. Demographics were similar across groups with exceptions in some baseline disease characteristics. Baseline imbalances and group-to-group variation were accounted for by covariate effects in each model. Predictions from the DAS28 and ACR models tracked the central tendency and distribution of observations well. No point estimates of mean differences were outside the reference range for DAS28 or ACR scores. The probabilities that the predicted differences between PF-05280586 vs. rituximab-EU or rituximab-US lie outside the reference ranges were low.ConclusionsNo clinically meaningful differences were detected in DAS28 or ACR response between PF-05280586 and rituximab-EU or rituximab-US as the differences were within the pre-specified reference ranges.Trial registration numberNCT01526057.
Project description:ObjectiveThis study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety (infection events) between rituximab (RTX), tacrolimus (TAC), mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), and cyclophosphamide (CYC) as induction therapies in lupus nephritis (LN).MethodsElectronic databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library, were searched from inception up to December 9, 2021. Bayesian network meta-analysis was used to combine the direct and indirect evidence of different drugs for LN patients. The pooled relative effects were shown using odds ratios (ORs) and 95% credible intervals (CrIs).ResultsNineteen studies (1,566 patients) met the inclusion criteria and were selected in the present study. The network meta-analysis reported that no statistically significant differences were found in partial remission (PR) and infection among the four drugs. RTX showed a significantly higher complete remission (CR) than MMF (OR = 2.60, 95% CrI = 1.00-7.10) and seemed to be more effective than CYC (OR = 4.20, 95% CrI = 1.70-14.00). MMF had a better CR than CYC (OR = 1.60, 95% CrI = 1.00-3.20). TAC presented a better overall response than CYC (OR = 3.70, 95% CrI = 1.20-12.00). Regarding CR and overall response, the maximum surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) values were 96.94% for RTX and 80.15% for TAC. The maximum SUCRA value of infection reaction was 74.98% for RTX and the minimum value was 30.17% for TAC, respectively.ConclusionsRTX and TAC were the most effective drugs for induction remission in LN. Among the four drugs, TAC had the lowest probability of infection, and RTX showed the highest probability of experiencing an infection. This meta-analysis could not conclude about other adverse events.
Project description:Biosimilars are products that are similar in terms of quality, safety, and efficacy to an already licensed reference/ innovator product and are expected to offer improved affordability. The most significant source of reduction in the cost of development of a biosimilar is the reduced clinical examination that it is expected to undergo as compared to the innovator product. However, this clinical relief is predicated on the assumption that there is analytical similarity between the biosimilar and the innovator product. As a result, establishing analytical similarity is arguably the most important step towards successful development of a biosimilar. Here, we present results from an analytical similarity exercise that was performed with five biosimilars of rituximab (Ristova®, Roche), a chimeric mouse/ human monoclonal antibody biotherapeutic, that are available on the Indian market. The results show that, while the biosimilars exhibited similarity with respect to protein structure and function, there were significant differences with respect to size heterogeneity, charge heterogeneity and glycosylation pattern.