Starting in 2017, the Henry Ford Cancer Institute started using follow-on filgrastim (tbo-filgrastim, a product approved prior to the establishment of the biosimilar approval pathway in the United States) and biosimilar filgrastim (Zarxio) in stem cell mobilization prior to transplant.
Biosimilars have been reported to result in similar stem cell yield during hematopoietic stem cell mobilization; in the past, a Canadian study reported that brand-name filgrastim and the biosimilar Grastofil demonstrated similar efficacy for stem cell mobilization and led to a successful CD34+ cell harvest for most patients. Another recent study found no difference in plerixafor use between the patients receiving the brand-name filgrastim versus those receiving the biosimilar Zarxio for mobilization.
However, fewer data are available on the effect of biosimilar use on the length of hospitalization for the transplant procedure, on engraftment, or on long-term survival after the transplant. One recent study sought to add to the body of data by reporting on transplant-specific outcomes related to the use of biosimilars.1
Starting in 2017, the Henry Ford Cancer Institute started using follow-on filgrastim (tbo-filgrastim, a product approved prior to the establishment of the biosimilar approval pathway in the United States) and biosimilar filgrastim (Zarxio) in stem cell mobilization prior to transplant. Researchers at this center conducted a study to evaluate the transplant-specific outcomes of using these agents in the transplant process.
The retrospective study evaluated all 113 patients at the center who received mobilization with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor therapies between 2017 and 2018. Of the 73 patients analyzed, 45% received tbo-filgrastim, 44% received the reference, and the remaining 11% of patients received the biosimilar.
In total, 86% of patients proceeded to transplant. No differences were observed in terms of adequate CD34+ yield among all 3 products, and no difference was observed in mobilization-associated complications, including bone pain and thrombocytopenia. The number of apheresis sessions required to collect an adequate CD34+ yield was not different among the 3 groups.
There were also no significant differences noted between groups with respect to time to neutrophil and platelet engraftment or length of hospital stay, and similar rates of infection, febrile neutropenia, and mucositis were observed in the 3 groups. Finally, relapse rates were similar among the groups.
These findings, note that authors, demonstrate that, among the 3 filgrastim options for pretransplant mobilization protocols, transplant-related outcomes for patients were similar.
Reference
1. Neme K, Henkin D, Mikulandric N, et al. Outcomes of tbo-filgrastim, filgrastim-sndz or filgrastim for mobilization in patients undergoing an autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant: a single center experience. Presented at: American Society of Clinical Oncology Annual Meeting 2019; May 31-June 4, 2019; Chicago, IL. Abstract e19000.
How AI Can Help Address Cost-Related Nonadherence to Biologic, Biosimilar Treatment
March 9th 2025Despite saving billions, biosimilars still account for only a small share of the biologics market—what's standing in the way of broader adoption and how can artificial intelligence (AI) help change that?
Empowering Vulnerable Populations: The Path to Equitable Biologic Therapy Access
December 22nd 2024Elie Bahou, PharmD, senior vice president and system chief pharmacy officer at Providence, discusses strategies to improve equitable access to biologic therapies, including tiered formularies, income-based cost sharing, patient assistance programs, and fostering payer partnerships.
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.
Commercial Payer Coverage of Biosimilars: Market Share, Pricing, and Policy Shifts
December 4th 2024Researchers observe significant shifts in payer preferences for originator vs biosimilar products from 2017 to 2022, revealing growing payer interest in multiple product options, alongside the increasing market share of biosimilars, which contributed to notable reductions in both average sales prices and wholesale acquisition costs.