健康志愿者体内两种阿达木单抗-adbm制剂的相对生物利用度、免疫原性和安全性:双盲、随机、单剂量、平行臂 I 期试验。

IF 3.6 3区 医学 Q2 BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-19 DOI:10.1080/14712598.2024.2354902
Viktoria Moschetti, Susanne Buschke, Julia Bertulis, Kathrin Hohl, Dorothy McCabe
{"title":"健康志愿者体内两种阿达木单抗-adbm制剂的相对生物利用度、免疫原性和安全性:双盲、随机、单剂量、平行臂 I 期试验。","authors":"Viktoria Moschetti, Susanne Buschke, Julia Bertulis, Kathrin Hohl, Dorothy McCabe","doi":"10.1080/14712598.2024.2354902","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>VOLTAIRE-HCLF compared the relative bioavailability of citrate-free high-concentration and reference formulations of the biosimilar adalimumab-adbm (Cyltezo®), including pharmacokinetic (PK) profiles, immunogenicity, and safety profiles in healthy volunteers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Healthy volunteers (<i>N</i> = 200) aged 18-55 years and with body mass index of 18.5-29.9 kg/m<sup>2</sup> and no prior exposure to adalimumab were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive a single subcutaneous injection of either adalimumab-adbm 40 mg/0.4 mL (high-concentration formulation) or 40 mg/0.8 mL (reference formulation). Participants completed 13 follow-up visits over 57 days, followed by a safety follow-up period of up to 70 days.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The main PK parameters were similar for the high-concentration and reference groups. For all primary endpoints, the geometric mean ratios and 90% confidence intervals of AUC<sub>0-1344</sub>, AUC<sub>0-∞</sub>, and C<sub>max</sub> for both groups were entirely within the standard 80-125% bioequivalence acceptance range at 101.88% (93.31-111.23%), 105.38% (95.06-116.81%), and 91.29% (84.38-98.76%), respectively. There were no differences in the proportion of anti-drug antibody-positive participants or in the distribution of anti-drug antibody titers between the two formulations at any time point after drug dosing. Participants who were given the high-concentration formulation of adalimumab-adbm experienced a lower incidence of adverse events and local reactions than those who were given the reference formulation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Overall, the high-concentration and reference adalimumab-adbm formulations had highly similar PK and immunogenicity profiles and were safe and well tolerated.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial registration: </strong>NCT05203289.</p>","PeriodicalId":12084,"journal":{"name":"Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"673-679"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Relative bioavailability, immunogenicity, and safety of two adalimumab-adbm formulations in healthy volunteers: a double-blind, randomized, single-dose, parallel-arm Phase I trial (VOLTAIRE-HCLF).\",\"authors\":\"Viktoria Moschetti, Susanne Buschke, Julia Bertulis, Kathrin Hohl, Dorothy McCabe\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14712598.2024.2354902\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>VOLTAIRE-HCLF compared the relative bioavailability of citrate-free high-concentration and reference formulations of the biosimilar adalimumab-adbm (Cyltezo®), including pharmacokinetic (PK) profiles, immunogenicity, and safety profiles in healthy volunteers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Healthy volunteers (<i>N</i> = 200) aged 18-55 years and with body mass index of 18.5-29.9 kg/m<sup>2</sup> and no prior exposure to adalimumab were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive a single subcutaneous injection of either adalimumab-adbm 40 mg/0.4 mL (high-concentration formulation) or 40 mg/0.8 mL (reference formulation). Participants completed 13 follow-up visits over 57 days, followed by a safety follow-up period of up to 70 days.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The main PK parameters were similar for the high-concentration and reference groups. For all primary endpoints, the geometric mean ratios and 90% confidence intervals of AUC<sub>0-1344</sub>, AUC<sub>0-∞</sub>, and C<sub>max</sub> for both groups were entirely within the standard 80-125% bioequivalence acceptance range at 101.88% (93.31-111.23%), 105.38% (95.06-116.81%), and 91.29% (84.38-98.76%), respectively. There were no differences in the proportion of anti-drug antibody-positive participants or in the distribution of anti-drug antibody titers between the two formulations at any time point after drug dosing. Participants who were given the high-concentration formulation of adalimumab-adbm experienced a lower incidence of adverse events and local reactions than those who were given the reference formulation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Overall, the high-concentration and reference adalimumab-adbm formulations had highly similar PK and immunogenicity profiles and were safe and well tolerated.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial registration: </strong>NCT05203289.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12084,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"673-679\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"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/10.1080/14712598.2024.2354902\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/5/19 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14712598.2024.2354902","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究目的本研究比较了生物类似药阿达木单抗-adbm(Cyltezo®)不含枸橼酸盐的高浓度制剂和参比制剂的相对生物利用度,包括健康志愿者的药代动力学(PK)特征、免疫原性和安全性特征。方法:年龄在18-55岁之间、体重指数在18.5-29.9 kg/m2之间、之前未接触过阿达木单抗的健康志愿者(N = 200)按1:1的比例随机接受阿达木单抗-adbm 40 mg/0.4 mL(高浓度制剂)或40 mg/0.8 mL(参比制剂)的单次皮下注射。参与者在57天内完成了13次随访,随后进行了长达70天的安全随访:高浓度组和参比组的主要 PK 参数相似。对于所有主要终点,两组的 AUC0-1344、AUC0-∞ 和 Cmax 的几何平均比和 90% 置信区间完全在 80-125% 生物等效性标准接受范围内,分别为 101.88% (93.31-111.23%)、105.38% (95.06-116.81%) 和 91.29% (84.38-98.76%)。在用药后的任何时间点,两种制剂的抗药抗体阳性参与者比例或抗药抗体滴度分布均无差异。与参比制剂相比,服用高浓度阿达木单抗-adbm制剂的参试者发生不良事件和局部反应的几率更低:总体而言,高浓度阿达木单抗-adbm制剂和参比制剂具有高度相似的PK和免疫原性特征,并且安全、耐受性良好:临床试验注册:NCT05203289。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Relative bioavailability, immunogenicity, and safety of two adalimumab-adbm formulations in healthy volunteers: a double-blind, randomized, single-dose, parallel-arm Phase I trial (VOLTAIRE-HCLF).

Objective: VOLTAIRE-HCLF compared the relative bioavailability of citrate-free high-concentration and reference formulations of the biosimilar adalimumab-adbm (Cyltezo®), including pharmacokinetic (PK) profiles, immunogenicity, and safety profiles in healthy volunteers.

Methods: Healthy volunteers (N = 200) aged 18-55 years and with body mass index of 18.5-29.9 kg/m2 and no prior exposure to adalimumab were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive a single subcutaneous injection of either adalimumab-adbm 40 mg/0.4 mL (high-concentration formulation) or 40 mg/0.8 mL (reference formulation). Participants completed 13 follow-up visits over 57 days, followed by a safety follow-up period of up to 70 days.

Results: The main PK parameters were similar for the high-concentration and reference groups. For all primary endpoints, the geometric mean ratios and 90% confidence intervals of AUC0-1344, AUC0-∞, and Cmax for both groups were entirely within the standard 80-125% bioequivalence acceptance range at 101.88% (93.31-111.23%), 105.38% (95.06-116.81%), and 91.29% (84.38-98.76%), respectively. There were no differences in the proportion of anti-drug antibody-positive participants or in the distribution of anti-drug antibody titers between the two formulations at any time point after drug dosing. Participants who were given the high-concentration formulation of adalimumab-adbm experienced a lower incidence of adverse events and local reactions than those who were given the reference formulation.

Conclusions: Overall, the high-concentration and reference adalimumab-adbm formulations had highly similar PK and immunogenicity profiles and were safe and well tolerated.

Clinical trial registration: NCT05203289.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy
Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy 医学-生物工程与应用微生物
CiteScore
8.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
96
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
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.
期刊最新文献
Emerging peptide-based technology for biofilm control. Comparing anti-drug antibody signal-to-noise ratios to assess immunogenicity and interchangeability in adalimumab biosimilar studies. Bispecific therapeutics: a state-of-the-art review on the combination of immune checkpoint ‎inhibition with costimulatory and non-checkpoint targeted therapy. Endoscopic endpoints in biologic clinical trials and beyond: the case for Crohn's Disease. Immunobiology of biliary tract cancer and recent clinical findings in approved and upcoming immune checkpoint inhibitors.
×
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