Lena Lemke, Andrew Blauvelt, Ines Brückmann, Hillel P Cohen, Jamie Fan, Davide Guerrieri, Matej Horvat, Johann Poetzl, Claudia Torella, Qingfeng Wang, Oliver von Richter
{"title":"Comparing anti-drug antibody signal-to-noise ratios to assess immunogenicity and interchangeability in adalimumab biosimilar studies.","authors":"Lena Lemke, Andrew Blauvelt, Ines Brückmann, Hillel P Cohen, Jamie Fan, Davide Guerrieri, Matej Horvat, Johann Poetzl, Claudia Torella, Qingfeng Wang, Oliver von Richter","doi":"10.1080/14712598.2024.2428299","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To support an interchangeability designation for Sandoz adalimumab biosimilar (GP2017), antidrug antibody (ADA) signal-to-noise (S/N) ratios were assessed in the GP2017 ADACCESS trial to directly assess potential changes in immunogenicity.</p><p><strong>Research design and methods: </strong>ADACCESS was a 51-week trial in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis that included patients treated continuously with reference adalimumab (cH), and patients who experienced four switches between reference adalimumab and GP2017 (H2H). ADAs were measured every 6 weeks during the switching phase using an electrochemiluminescence assay. A non-parametric analysis was performed to estimate the 90% confidence interval (CI) of the median of difference in ADA S/N ratios between the cH and H2H treatment groups at week 41. If the 90% CI was within the margin of -0.16 to 0.16 (representing assay noise), this was considered a non-clinically meaningful difference in immunogenicity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The 90% CIs of the median of difference in ADA S/N ratios between the two treatment groups were within the defined margin of -0.16 to 0.16 at week 41, and at all other time points. Efficacy and safety data were also similar between the treatment groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Analysis of ADA S/N ratios showed no increase in immunogenicity following up to four switches between reference adalimumab and GP2017.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>NCT02016105.</p>","PeriodicalId":12084,"journal":{"name":"Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"1-11"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14712598.2024.2428299","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: To support an interchangeability designation for Sandoz adalimumab biosimilar (GP2017), antidrug antibody (ADA) signal-to-noise (S/N) ratios were assessed in the GP2017 ADACCESS trial to directly assess potential changes in immunogenicity.
Research design and methods: ADACCESS was a 51-week trial in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis that included patients treated continuously with reference adalimumab (cH), and patients who experienced four switches between reference adalimumab and GP2017 (H2H). ADAs were measured every 6 weeks during the switching phase using an electrochemiluminescence assay. A non-parametric analysis was performed to estimate the 90% confidence interval (CI) of the median of difference in ADA S/N ratios between the cH and H2H treatment groups at week 41. If the 90% CI was within the margin of -0.16 to 0.16 (representing assay noise), this was considered a non-clinically meaningful difference in immunogenicity.
Results: The 90% CIs of the median of difference in ADA S/N ratios between the two treatment groups were within the defined margin of -0.16 to 0.16 at week 41, and at all other time points. Efficacy and safety data were also similar between the treatment groups.
Conclusion: Analysis of ADA S/N ratios showed no increase in immunogenicity following up to four switches between reference adalimumab and GP2017.
期刊介绍：
Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy (1471-2598; 1744-7682) is a MEDLINE-indexed, international journal publishing peer-reviewed research across all aspects of biological therapy.
Each article is structured to incorporate the author’s own expert opinion on the impact of the topic on research and clinical practice and the scope for future development.
The audience consists of scientists and managers in the healthcare and biopharmaceutical industries and others closely involved in the development and application of biological therapies for the treatment of human disease.
The journal welcomes:
Reviews covering therapeutic antibodies and vaccines, peptides and proteins, gene therapies and gene transfer technologies, cell-based therapies and regenerative medicine
Drug evaluations reviewing the clinical data on a particular biological agent
Original research papers reporting the results of clinical investigations on biological agents and biotherapeutic-based studies with a strong link to clinical practice
Comprehensive coverage in each review is complemented by the unique Expert Collection format and includes the following sections:
Expert Opinion – a personal view of the data presented in the article, a discussion on the developments that are likely to be important in the future, and the avenues of research likely to become exciting as further studies yield more detailed results;
Article Highlights – an executive summary of the author’s most critical points.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
