This week, investigators published the results of the MAPLE study, a phase 3 trial of Amgen’s bevacizumab in comparison with the reference, Avastin, in patients with advance nonsquamous non–small cell lung cancer who were also receiving first-line chemotherapy with carboplatin and paclitaxel.
Amgen’s bevacizumab, ABP 215, is approved under the brand name Mvasi in both the United States and in the European Union as a biosimilar to the reference product, Avastin, though the biosimilar has not yet launched in either territory. This week, investigators published the results of the MAPLE study, a phase 3 trial of the biosimilar in comparison with the reference in patients with advance nonsquamous non—small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who were also receiving first-line chemotherapy with carboplatin and paclitaxel.
In total, 642 patients with stage IV or recurrent metastatic disease were randomized to receive intravenous doses of either the biosimilar (n = 328) or the reference (n = 314). The primary efficacy end point was the risk ratio of objective response rate (ORR). Clinical equivalence of the primary end point was determined to be met if the 2-sided 90% confidence interval (CI) of the risk ratio in ORR between the biosimilar and the reference fell within the prespecified equivalence margin of 0.67 and 1.5.
The number of bevacizumab doses in the 2 treatment arms was similar, with the mean number of doses reaching 4.8 (standard deviation [SD], 1.76) in the biosimilar arm and 5.0 (SD, 1.61) in the reference arm.
In total, 128 (39.0%) patients in the biosimilar arm and 131 (41.7%) patients in the reference arm had objective responses. Two patients in each arm had complete responses. Progression-free survival and overall survival were comparable in both groups, and the risk ratio for ORR was 0.93 (90% CI, 0.80-1.09); the 2-sided 90% CI for ORR therefore fell within the prespecified margin for demonstrating clinical equivalence. Clinical equivalence was supported by comparing the risk difference (RD) of ORR between groups. The RD between treatment arms was —2.90% (90% CI, 9.2%-3.45%) in the intention-to-treat population based on central review.
In the biosimilar group, 85 patients (26.2%) had serious adverse events (AEs) versus 71 patients (23.0%) in the reference group. These AEs included febrile neutropenia, neutropenia, pneumonia, pulmonary embolism, anemia, dyspnea, and hemoptysis. In total, 24 patients (13 in the biosimilar arm and 11 in the reference arm) experienced a fatal AE during treatment.
Four patients (1.4%) in the biosimilar arm and 7 patients (2.5%) in the reference arm developed binding antidrug antibodies (ADAs) during the study. Three patients in each arm had transient binding ADAs. No patients tested positive to neutralizing antibodies.
The authors concluded that the study met its primary endpoint, that AEs were comparable between study arms, that immunogenicity was similar between arms, and that the MAPLE study “completes the totality of evidence recommended by regulatory agencies for biosimilars development.”
Reference
Thatcher N, Goldschmidt JH, Thomas M, et al. Efficacy & safety of biosimilar ABP 215 compared with bevacizumab in patients with advanced non—small cell lung cancer (MAPLE): a randomized, double-blind, phase 3 study [published online January 7, 2018]. Clin Cancer Res. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-18-2702.
A Banner Year for Biosimilars: The 19 FDA Approvals From 2024
January 21st 2025In 2024, the FDA approved 19 biosimilars across various therapeutic areas, including the first biosimilars for ustekinumab and denosumab, marking significant progress in expanding treatment options and market competition.
Biosimilars in America: Overcoming Barriers and Maximizing Impact
July 21st 2024Join us as we explore the complexities of the US biosimilars market, discussing legislative influences, payer and provider adoption factors, and strategies to overcome industry challenges with expert insights from Kyle Noonan, PharmD, MS, value & access strategy manager at Cencora.
The Next Frontier: Oncology Biosimilars in 2025 and Beyond
January 13th 2025The US oncology biosimilar market has rapidly evolved since its launch in 2017, driven by steep price discounts, payer adoption, and provider confidence, with an upcoming wave of biosimilars targeting blockbuster biologics promising further market growth, cost savings, and broader patient access.
Biosimilars Oncology Roundup for June 2024—Podcast Edition
July 7th 2024On this episode of Not So Different, we review biosimilar news coming out of June, with clinical trial results from conferences and a study showcasing how to overcome economic and noneconomic barriers to oncology biosimilars.
How Vertical Integration Drives Innovation and Access in Biosimilars
December 27th 2024Elie Bahou, PharmD, highlights how vertical integration in the biosimilar industry streamlines costs, improves supply reliability, accelerates market adoption, and enhances patient access, while emphasizing the value of collaboration, quality control, and value-based contracts for sustainable health care delivery.
Top 5 Most-Read Oncology Articles of 2024
December 24th 2024The top 5 oncology biosimilar articles in 2024 cover Duke's recommendations for cell and gene therapy biosimilars, FDA approval of Shanghai Henlius Biotech's trastuzumab biosimilar, Boehringer Ingelheim layoffs, the safety of rituximab biosimilar CT-P10, and more.