Switching between adalimumab products does not affect drug effectiveness or treatment duration in patients who have psoriasis, according to a Danish study.
Adalimumab biosimilars GP2017 (Hyrimoz) and SB5 (Hadlima) showed no discernible differences in drug survival or effectiveness for patients who have psoriasis following a nonmedical mandatory switch from the adalimumab originator, according to a Danish nationwide cohort study.1
Switching between adalimumab products does not affect drug effectiveness or treatment duration in patients who have psoriasis, according to a Danish study. | Image credit: pimentos - stock.adobe.com
This study, published in Acta Dermato-Venereologica, was conducted to address the lack of direct comparisons between biosimilars derived from the same originator after patients undergo nonmedical switching between products.
Both Hyrimoz and Hadlima have been approved in the US and European Union.2
With the growing availability of biosimilars for moderate to severe psoriasis, it remains unclear whether those derived from the same originator, like GP2017 and SB5, perform equivalently in real-world settings. This study used a pseudorandomized observational design to compare their drug survival following a nonmedical mandatory switch from reference adalimumab to a biosimilar in a Danish population.
Researchers relied on data from DERMBIO, a Danish national registry tracking biologic treatments for psoriasis, to analyze drug survival of 2 adalimumab biosimilars, GP2017 and SB5, after a nonmedical mandatory switch in November 2018. Patients were assigned biosimilars based on regional drug allocation, creating a pseudorandomized observational design. Adults who switched from the adalimumab originator between November 2018 and April 2019 were included, and they each needed a 1-year follow-up to assess drug discontinuation rates. Kaplan-Meier plots and Cox proportional hazard regression models, adjusted for patient demographics and treatment history, were used to compare drug survival between GP2017 and SB5, with additional sensitivity analyses examining Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI) scores and comparisons to the originator using propensity score matching.
Of the initial 568 patients identified, 43 were excluded, leaving 525 patients who switched from the adalimumab originator (n = 268 switched to GP2017; n = 257 switched to SB5). The median age was 52 years for SB5 users and 51 years for GP2017 users, with prior adalimumab treatment durations of 7.2 and 6.8 years, respectively. Discontinuation rates were similar between the biosimilars (7.1% for the GP2017 group and 7.4% for the SB5 group; HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.58-2.12).
The most common reason for discontinuation was lack of effect (52.6%), followed by adverse events (31.6%). A subanalysis of patients with under 2 years of prior adalimumab use found no difference in drug survival between the biosimilars. When comparing GP2017 and SB5 with the adalimumab originator using propensity score matching, no significant difference in drug survival was observed (GP2017: HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.53-1.92; SB5: HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.68-2.29).
Additionally, there was no significant change in PASI scores following the switch, with scores remaining stable in 40.9% of SB5 users and 43.1% of GP2017 users, with slight improvements or worsening occurring in a small percentage of patients.
The study's main limitations include potential unresolved bias from differences in prior treatment experience or living conditions, reliance on drug discontinuation as the sole measure of survival, nonrandom missing data, and variability in medical appointment intervals, which could affect PASI assessments but likely had minimal impact on overall findings.
The authors concluded, “Although highly speculative, the presented results, together with previous studies, could suggest that switching between biosimilars is unlikely to negatively impact disease control.”
References
1. Sieborg J, Maul J-T, Wu JJ, et al. Real-world drug survival of biosimilar SB5 vs GP2017 following a mandatory non-medical switch from adalimumab originator for psoriasis: a nationwide cohort study. Acta Derm Venereol. Published online March 3, 2025. doi:10.2340/actadv.v105.42572
2. Jeremias S. First round of adalimumab biosimilar launches in July. The Center for Biosimilars®. July 2, 2023. Accessed March 25, 2025. https://www.centerforbiosimilars.com/view/first-round-of-adalimumab-biosimilar-launches-in-july
President Trump Signs Executive Order to Bring Down Drug Prices
April 16th 2025To help bring down sky-high drug prices, President Donald Trump signed an executive order pushing for faster biosimilar development, more transparency, and tougher rules on pharmacy benefit managers—aiming to save billions and make meds more affordable for everyone.
Will the FTC Be More PBM-Friendly Under a Second Trump Administration?
February 23rd 2025On this episode of Not So Different, we explore the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) second interim report on pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) with Joe Wisniewski from Turquoise Health, discussing key issues like preferential reimbursement, drug pricing transparency, biosimilars, shifting regulations, and how a second Trump administration could reshape PBM practices.
Latest Biosimilar Deals Signal Growth Across Immunology, Oncology Markets
April 14th 2025During Q1 2025, pharmaceutical companies accelerated biosimilar expansion through strategic acquisitions and partnerships in hopes of boosting patient access to lower-cost treatments in immunology and oncology.
Biosimilars Policy Roundup for September 2024—Podcast Edition
October 6th 2024On this episode of Not So Different, we discuss the FDA's approval of a new biosimilar for treating retinal conditions, which took place in September 2024 alongside other major industry developments, including ongoing legal disputes and broader trends in market dynamics and regulatory challenges.
BioRationality: Commemorating the 15th Anniversary of the BPCIA
April 8th 2025Affirming that analytical characterization is often sufficient for biosimilar approval, minimizing unnecessary clinical testing, and enhancing FDA-led education to counter stakeholder misconceptions are key recommendations put forth in this opinion piece by Sarfaraz K. Niazi, PhD.