Real Life Switching from Infliximab Innovator to Biosimilar in Rheumatic Diseases: A 6-Month Single-Centre Prospective Observational Study

A. Anjum, W. L. Ng, A. Sebastian, J. Devlin, A. Fraser
{"title":"Real Life Switching from Infliximab Innovator to Biosimilar in Rheumatic Diseases: A 6-Month Single-Centre Prospective Observational Study","authors":"A. Anjum, W. L. Ng, A. Sebastian, J. Devlin, A. Fraser","doi":"10.26502/fjr.26880011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Although Inflectra, biosimilar infliximab, has been approved by the EMA since September 2013 for all licensed indications of Remicade (innovator infliximab) but there is a paucity of real-world data and guidelines regarding switching from innovator Remicade to Inflectra. \n \nObjectives: To explore efficacy, safety, and retention rate of biosimilar Inflectra when switching from Remicade, in patients with rheumatic diseases. \n \nMethods: Informed consent was sought from all patients attending our rheumatology unit to undertake a switching programme. Baseline demographics and clinical characteristics were obtained before switching to Inflectra. Disease activity and safety assessment were undertaken before and then every 12 weeks after switching. The retention rate of Inflectra switch patients was compared with a cohort of non-switch Inflectra naive (11 patients) and historic Remicade (31 patients) patients. \n \nResults: Thirty out of thirty-one patients {median (IQR) age 50 (18), 20F} with various rheumatic diseases (9 with diagnosis of AS, 6 with RA, 6 with Behcet’s disease, 3 with Enteropathic arthritis, 2 with psoriatic arthritis) agreed to the switch. There was no statistical difference noted between pre-switch and 6 months post-switch mean values of PGA (p=0.37), BASDAI (p=0.60), ASDAS-CRP (p=0.90), DAS28CRP (p=0.85), DAS28ESR (p=0.45), CRP (p=0.09), Behcet’s disease activity score (p=0.77) and HAQ-DI (p=0.18). The retention rate on Inflectra switch was 86.7% as compared to 90.9% in the Inflectra naive cohort and 100% for historic Remicade cohort. \n \nConclusion: These results demonstrate that in this cohort at 6 months Inflectra is comparable to Remicade in efficacy and there are no new safety signals.","PeriodicalId":309938,"journal":{"name":"Fortune Journal of Rheumatology","volume":"34 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Fortune Journal of Rheumatology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26502/fjr.26880011","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Background: Although Inflectra, biosimilar infliximab, has been approved by the EMA since September 2013 for all licensed indications of Remicade (innovator infliximab) but there is a paucity of real-world data and guidelines regarding switching from innovator Remicade to Inflectra. Objectives: To explore efficacy, safety, and retention rate of biosimilar Inflectra when switching from Remicade, in patients with rheumatic diseases. Methods: Informed consent was sought from all patients attending our rheumatology unit to undertake a switching programme. Baseline demographics and clinical characteristics were obtained before switching to Inflectra. Disease activity and safety assessment were undertaken before and then every 12 weeks after switching. The retention rate of Inflectra switch patients was compared with a cohort of non-switch Inflectra naive (11 patients) and historic Remicade (31 patients) patients. Results: Thirty out of thirty-one patients {median (IQR) age 50 (18), 20F} with various rheumatic diseases (9 with diagnosis of AS, 6 with RA, 6 with Behcet’s disease, 3 with Enteropathic arthritis, 2 with psoriatic arthritis) agreed to the switch. There was no statistical difference noted between pre-switch and 6 months post-switch mean values of PGA (p=0.37), BASDAI (p=0.60), ASDAS-CRP (p=0.90), DAS28CRP (p=0.85), DAS28ESR (p=0.45), CRP (p=0.09), Behcet’s disease activity score (p=0.77) and HAQ-DI (p=0.18). The retention rate on Inflectra switch was 86.7% as compared to 90.9% in the Inflectra naive cohort and 100% for historic Remicade cohort. Conclusion: These results demonstrate that in this cohort at 6 months Inflectra is comparable to Remicade in efficacy and there are no new safety signals.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
风湿病从英夫利昔单抗创新药物到生物仿制药的转变:一项为期6个月的单中心前瞻性观察研究
背景:尽管自2013年9月以来,英夫利昔单抗生物仿制药Inflectra已被EMA批准用于Remicade(创新药物英夫利昔单抗)的所有许可适应症,但缺乏从创新药物Remicade转换为Inflectra的实际数据和指南。目的:探讨生物类似药Inflectra在风湿病患者从Remicade转换时的疗效、安全性和保留率。方法:在风湿病科就诊的所有患者中寻求知情同意以进行转换计划。在使用Inflectra之前获得基线人口统计学和临床特征。在转换前和转换后每12周进行一次疾病活动性和安全性评估。将未使用Inflectra的患者与未使用Inflectra的患者(11例)和使用Remicade的患者(31例)进行比较。结果:31例患有各种风湿性疾病的患者(中位年龄50(18),20)中有30例(诊断为AS 9例,RA 6例,Behcet病6例,肠病性关节炎3例,银屑病关节炎2例)同意转换。切换前与切换后6个月PGA (p=0.37)、BASDAI (p=0.60)、ASDAS-CRP (p=0.90)、DAS28CRP (p=0.85)、DAS28ESR (p=0.45)、CRP (p=0.09)、Behcet病活动度评分(p=0.77)、HAQ-DI (p=0.18)的平均值比较,差异均无统计学意义。Inflectra转换的保留率为86.7%,而Inflectra初始组为90.9%,Remicade历史组为100%。结论:这些结果表明,在6个月的队列中,Inflectra的疗效与Remicade相当,没有新的安全性信号。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Correlation Analysis between NETosis Biomarkers and Peripheral Immune Cells in a Preclinical Model of Ischemic Stroke Thoracolumbar Fascia Enthesopathy as a Cause of Low Back Pain: A Retrospective and Follow-up Study Transient Osteoporosis of the Hip: State of the Art and Review of Literature Osteoarthritis Treatment-The Newer Treatment Options Acknowledgement to Authors, Reviewers and Editors of Fortune Journal of Rheumatology in 2021
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1