The rituximab biosimilar candidate ABP 798 met primary and secondary end points for safety, efficacy, and immunogenicity in a study presented at ASCO20 Virtual, the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO).
Results of a study presented at ASCO20 Virtual, the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, confirmed the clinical equivalence of the rituximab biosimilar candidate ABP 798.
Efficacy results demonstrated no clinically meaningful differences, and safety and immunogenicity were found to be similar between the reference product and ABP 798, according to Dietger Niederwieser, MD, a professor of medicine and head of the Division of Hematology and Oncology at University Hospital Leipzig in Germany.
The safety profile for the biosimilar candidate also was similar to that of the reference product (Rituxan in the United States and MabThera in the European Union).
“Together with analytical, functional, and clinical [pharmacokinetic (PK)/pharmacodynamic (PD) findings], these clinical efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity results provide the totality of evidence to support similarity of ABP 798 with [reference] rituximab,” Niederwieser and other investigators wrote.
The biosimilar is the subject of a Biologics License Application submitted for review to the FDA in December 2019 by Amgen and Allergan, which are collaborating on multiple oncology biosimilars. Since that time, Allergan has been merged into AbbVie.
Rituximab is a CD20-directed cytolytic antibody that in the United States has been approved for the treatment of non-Hodgkin lymphoma, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, and rheumatoid arthritis.
Study Findings
Investigators enrolled rituximab-naïve adult patients (N = 250) with grade 1, 2, or 3a follicular B-cell lymphoma expressing CD20. They were randomized 1:1 to ABP 798 or reference rituximab at a dose of 375 mg/m2 every week for 4 weeks followed by repeated dosing at weeks 12 and 20.
The primary and secondary end points were efficacy as measured by the risk difference (RD) of overall response rate (ORR). Additional end points were trough serum concentrations and the percent of patients with complete depletion of CD19-positive cell count at day 8. Adverse events and immunogenicity, or the incidence of developing antidrug antibodies, were also measured.
Clinical equivalence for the primary end point was measured by comparing performance of ABP 798 with the one-sided, 95% upper and lower confidence limits of the reference product at week 28, with noninferiority margins established at —15% and 35.5%.
In the primary analysis, investigators found that the biosimilar candidate efficacy was within the predefined equivalence margins (lower, —1.4%; upper, 16.8%) and results at week 12 also supported similarity (–9.3%, 11.2%).
Serum concentrations over time were similar, meeting the PK end point. Investigators said the percent of patients with complete depletion of CD19-positive cell count at day 8 also was similar between the groups, indicating equivalent B-cell depletion between the biosimilar candidate and the reference product.
The adverse event (AE) profiles also were similar: 83.6% of patients in the ABP 798 cohort (n = 128) experienced any AE, and 10.9% experienced grade ≥3 AE; the respective AE numbers for the reference product were 75.4% (126) and 10.3%.
“Overall, the severities of all AEs observed were within the grades of severity expected for the reference product; no new safety signals were identified,” investigators wrote. ABP 798 also passed the immunogenicity test. Investigators said there were no clinically meaningful differences between treatment groups with regard to the incidence of developing antidrug antibodies.
Reference
Niederwieser D, Hamm C, Cobb P, et al. Efficacy of ABP 798 compared with rituximab RP: results from the comparative clinical study in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Presented at ASCO20 Virtual, May 30-31, 2020. Poster 8044
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.
Stable Patient Satisfaction Found After Switching From the Humira or Biosimilar CT-P17
December 14th 2024A real-world study in France found patient satisfaction was stable after switching from either the reference product or a low-concentration adalimumab biosimilar to the adalimumab biosimilar CT-P17, a high-concentration, citrate-free formulation.
Breaking Barriers in Osteoporosis Care: New Denosumab Biosimilars Wyost, Jubbonti Approved
June 16th 2024In this episode, The Center for Biosimilars® delves into the FDA approval of the first denosumab biosimilars, Wyost and Jubbonti (denosumab-bbdz), and discuss their potential to revolutionize osteoporosis treatment with expert insights from 2 rheumatologists.
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.
Pertuzumab Biosimilar Shows Promise in HER2-Positive Breast Cancer Treatment
December 9th 2024The proposed pertuzumab biosimilar QL1209 demonstrated equivalent efficacy and safety to reference pertuzumab (Perjeta) in neoadjuvant treatment of HER2-positive, ER/PR-negative early or locally advanced breast cancer, offering a cost-effective alternative with comparable clinical outcomes.