Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) receive additional evidence on the safety and efficacy of adalimumab biosimilar GP2017 treatment.
A study confirmed the effectiveness and safety of GP2017in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) who were naïve to adalimumab or switched from the originator (Humira) or another adalimumab biosimilar.
The observational, multi-centric, retrospective study was conducted in 2 IBD centers in Northern Italy by analyzing patients with IBD, an umbrella term for Crohn disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC). Data surrounding GP2017 has been scarce, especially in patients with IBD, since its July 2018 European Medicines Agency (EMA) approval was supported by data testing the product in plaque psoriasis. GP2017 (Hyrimoz/Hefiya) 1 of 10 EMA-approved adalimumab biosimilar.
Participants included patients with a diagnosis of CD or UC, ongoing or previous therapy for GP2017, and at least 6 months of follow up after beginning the GP2017. The patients were administered subcutaneous injections of 160 mg at baseline, 80 mg at 2 weeks, followed by 40 mg maintenance doses every 2 weeks for patients naïve to adalimumab. However, patients who switched from the originator or from another biosimilar received a standard maintenance dose of 40 mg every 2 weeks.
Overall, the study included a total of 72 patients with an IBD diagnosis. GP2017 was administered to 29 patients (40.3%) as the first form of adalimumab therapy. There were 33 patients that were first treated with the adalimumab originator (45.8%) and 10 who were initially treated with a different adalimumab biosimilar (13.8%).
Prior to GP2017 treatment, 5 patients reported clinical remission (17.2%), 16 had mild disease activity (55.1%), and 8 communicated moderate-to-severe activity (27.6%). After 6 months, 10 of the 29 treated with GP2017 were considered in remission (34.5%), 17 had mild activity (58.6%), and 8 had moderate-to-severe activity (27.6%). Following 12 months, 17 patients concluded remission (58.6%), 9 reported mild activity (31%), and only 1 patient had moderate-to-severe activity present (3.5%). There were 5 patients in remission at baseline, 10 patients after 6 months (P = .0005) and 17 patients noted remission after 12 months (P = .001).
Overall, 33 patients were switched from the originator to GP2017. When first administered, 25 patients reported clinical remission (75.8%), 6 were in mild activity (18.2%), and 2 had moderate-to-severe activity present (6%). The following 6 months included 26 patients reaching remission (78.8%), 4 with mild activity (12.1%), and only 1 out of 33 had moderate-to-severe activity (3%). After the 12-month follow-up period ,26 patients were in clinical remission (78.8%), 2 had mild activity (6.1%), and 0 patients had moderate-to-severe activity.
Regarding the 10 participants who switched from another adalimumab biosimilar to GP2017, at baseline, 6 patients were in clinical remission, 3 had mild activity present, and only 1 had moderate-to-severe activity. At 6-months ,7 patients were in remission, 2 had mild activity, and 1 patient had moderate-to-severe activity. At month 12, 7 patients were in remission, 2 had mild activity, and 0 patients had moderate-to-severe activity.
Only 11 patients experienced nonserious side effects, including headache, allergic reactions, arthralgia, and cutaneous manifestations, in line with those identified for the originator. Additionally, 9 patients discontinued treatment, mainly due to adverse events or secondary failure.Study limitations surrounded the observational data collection potentially influenced by missing information or demographics, absence of certain procedures, lack of control groups, and smaller sample sizes for UC compared to patients with CD. Statistics could be affected regarding the subgroup sample size of patients who switched from other adalimumab biosimilars.
The author stated, “Moreover, the retention rate and safety profile are comparable to those present in the literature regarding the originator, justifying the feasibility to switch from the originator to a biosimilar or from biosimilar to biosimilar.”
Reference
Vernero M, Bezzio C, Ribaldone DG, et al. Efficacy and safety of adalimumab biosimilar GP2017 in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. J. ClinMed. 2023; 12(21):6839. doi:0.3390/jcm12216839
Biosimilars Gastroenterology Roundup for November 2024—Podcast Edition
December 1st 2024On this episode of Not So Different, we discuss market changes in the adalimumab space; calls for PBM transparency and biosimilar access reforms grew; new data for biosimilars in gastroenterology conditions; and all the takeaways from this year's Global Biosimilars Week.
Eye on Pharma: Golimumab Biosimilar Update; Korea Approves Denosumab; Xbrane, Intas Collaboration
December 10th 2024Alvotech and Advanz Pharma have submitted a European marketing application for their golimumab biosimilar to treat inflammatory diseases, while Celltrion secured Korean approval for denosumab biosimilars, and Intas Pharmaceuticals partnered with Xbrane Biopharma on a nivolumab biosimilar.
Biosimilars Gastroenterology Roundup for May 2024—Podcast Edition
June 2nd 2024On this episode of Not So Different, we review the biggest gastroenterology biosimilar stories from May 2024, covering new data from conferences and journals on infliximab and adalimumab products that demonstrate positive clinical results and confirm the safety of these biosimilars, as well as the feasibility of switching to them.
Cost and Efficacy Insights on Infliximab Biosimilars in Pediatric Uveitis
December 3rd 2024The study highlights the safety, efficacy, and cost benefits of infliximab biosimilars in managing pediatric noninfectious uveitis, showing fewer disease flares and reduced costs compared with reference infliximab, as well as the influence of insurance mandates on treatment decisions.
Perceptions of Biosimilar Switching Among Veterans With IBD
December 2nd 2024Veterans with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) prioritize shared decision-making, transparency, and individualized care in biosimilar switching, favoring delayed switching for severe cases and greater patient control.