Biosimilar Infliximab Research Articles

Neurosarcoidosis Masquerading as Spinal Stenosis.

A 65-year-old woman was admitted to the neurology department with a suspected demyelinating disease due to complaints of progressive pain and weakness in both upper and lower limbs, as well as urinary incontinence. MRI of the spine revealed complex disc osteophyte with compression of the spinal cord in the cervical and lumbar spine at several vertebral levels, and localized enhancement in the cervical spine at the site of maximal spinal canal stenosis. During her hospitalization, the patient underwent extensive evaluation to rule out any systematic inflammatory diseases, infections, and malignancy. Chest CT revealed bilateral mediastinal lymphadenopathy. Transbronchial mediastinal lymph node biopsy showed numerous non-necrotizing granulomas without evidence of malignancy. After a thorough and careful exclusion of a demyelinating, infectious, and paraneoplastic myelopathies, and based on clinical, radiographic, and pathological findings, the patient was diagnosed with both neurosarcoidosis and spondylotic myelopathy. She was then treated for neurosarcoidosis, including glucocorticosteroids, azathioprine, and a biosimilar of the anti-TNF alpha agent infliximab, resulting in both clinical and radiographic improvement. Intramedullary spinal neurosarcoidosis is very rare and may present with clinical features of spondylotic myelopathy, with typical imaging findings occurring only in areas of spinal canal stenosis.

Pharmacokinetic comparison of subcutaneously administered CT-P13 (biosimilar of infliximab) via autoinjector and pre-filled syringe in healthy participants.

CT-P13, a biosimilar of infliximab, is used to treat inflammatory diseases that arise from immune system complications, resulting in excessive and persistent inflammation. The subcutaneous (SC) formulation of CT-P13 overcomes the drawback of prolonged administration associated with the intravenous (IV) infliximab biosimilar, necessitating autoinjector (AI) administration. This randomized, open-label, two-arm, parallel-group, single-dose clinical pharmacology study aimed to evaluate the pharmacokinetics (PK) and safety of CT-P13 SC administration via AI compared with the existing pre-filled syringe (PFS) method. A total of 147 healthy participants were randomized into two groups, of which 139 completed the study. Blood samples were collected from before CT-P13 SC administration to 2016 h after the start of the administration. Serum concentrations were analyzed using the Meso Scale Discovery electrochemiluminescence method. Geometric mean ratios (90% confidence interval) of the AUCinf (areas under the concentration-time curve from zero to infinity) and Cmax (The maximum serum concentration) for CT-P13 SC AI versus CT-P13 SC PFS groups, were 94.15% (85.02%-104.26%), 92.48% (84.66%-101.01%), respectively. CT-P13 SC AI and CT-P13 SC PFS achieved comparable PK because the 90% CI was within the predefined equivalence margin. At the end of the study, immunogenicity results revealed that 70 (97.22%) and 73 (98.65%) participants tested positive for anti-drug antibody (ADA) in the CT-P13 SC AI and CT-P13 SC PFS groups, respectively. They were tested positive for neutralizing antibodies. No other significant safety differences were observed between the treatment groups. In conclusion, both administrations demonstrated PK equivalence and were both safe and well-tolerated.

S3905 Smoke and Mirrors: Infliximab Biosimilar Induced Pustular Psoriasis After Immunization

S3905 Smoke and Mirrors: Infliximab Biosimilar Induced Pustular Psoriasis After Immunization

Incidence of serious infection among etanercept and infliximab initiators: safety comparison between biosimilars and bio-originators with Canadian population-based data

BackgroundSafety remains a significant concern for biologic drugs, and studies are needed to ensure a comparable safety profile for biosimilars and their legacy treatments. Using Canadian administrative health data from 2015–2019, we compared the incidence of serious infection between biosimilars and bio-originators initiators for etanercept and infliximab, two of the most commonly used biologics during this time.MethodsWe performed a retrospective cohort study using pan-Canadian data (except Quebec) from the National Prescription Drug Utilization Information System linked to hospitalization data. We studied new users of infliximab or etanercept (January/2015-December/2019) and compared incidence rates of serious infection, defined as those which required hospitalization, by using Cox regression models adjusted by biological sex, age at treatment initiation, prior corticosteroid or biologic, province, and calendar year.ResultsWe studied 6,583 etanercept users (mean age 62) and 7,202 infliximab users (mean age 45). Hospitalization with infections occurred in 7% of infliximab and 2% of etanercept users. Comparing the risk of infection between biosimilar to bio-originator, the adjusted hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) was 1.33 (0.77, 2.30) for etanercept and 0.93 (0.72, 1.18) for infliximab.ConclusionsOur study found no clear difference between etanercept and infliximab biosimilars and their bio-originators for infection incidence, suggesting a similar safety profile.

Long-term Safety Monitoring and Efficacy Status of Infliximab and its Biosimilars in Psoriasis Management

Abstract: Infliximab (INF), a murine human monoclonal antibody, is a substantially more successful biologic than topical drugs for treating mild to severe psoriasis because it clears the skin rapidly due to its fast onset of action. Loss of responsiveness over time and some adverse effects, especially the experience of infusion reactions, are the major causes of non-compliance with INF medication. Therefore, evaluation of the long-term reliability of anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) medications is necessary for the assessment of the risks associated with long-term anti-TNF therapy. For psoriasis, there are registered safety statistics; however, these individuals might not receive the same level of care as those in a randomized study. Few assessments of the safety of anti- TNF medications across indications, including their biosimilars, are present, but it’s still unknown how anti-infliximab antibodies arise and produce harmful effects. INF biosimilars, when subjected to human studies to reduce cost and improve access, provide therapeutic benefits with associated adverse events, showing variations in incidence depending upon varying patient populations and no new safety indications. During therapy, certain individuals develop antibodies against INF, which are believed to be linked to a loss of response (LOR). Additional research aimed at identifying individuals who are susceptible to treatment resistance is likely to assist doctors in accurately selecting the appropriate candidates for anti-TNF-α therapy and enhancing the long-term effectiveness of the treatment. From clinical studies, we expect to learn about how to utilize INF or its biosimilars more effectively in the management of psoriasis. Therefore, the paper focuses on the efficacy and safety monitoring of INF and developed biological therapies.

Real-world experience with biosimilar infliximab-adba and infliximab-dyyb among infliximab-naïve patients with inflammatory bowel disease in the Veterans Health Administration.

The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) listed the infliximab (IFX) biosimilar, IFX-dyyb (Inflectra), on the Veterans Affairs National Formulary (VANF) in May 2017. In September 2018, biosimilar IFX-abda (Renflexis) became the VANF IFX product. The recommended formulary changes from one IFX biosimilar to another provided a unique opportunity to study IFX utilization patterns in IFX-naïve Veterans with Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD). This study aimed to describe IFX and healthcare utilization during the 365 days after initiation with IFX reference product (RP) or biosimilars IFX-dyyb and IFX-adba. This descriptive study was performed using the VHA Corporate Data Warehouse. All Veterans initiated on IFX-RP (Remicade) or biosimilars IFX-dyyb and IFX-adba between September 1, 2016 and December 30, 2019 were included and followed for 365 days. Veterans enrolled in the VHA for at least 365 days with no evidence of IFX before their index date were considered IFX-naïve. Continuous data on IFX use, laboratory measurements, and healthcare utilization were reported with means, 95% confidence interval (CI), medians, and interquartile ranges. Frequency, proportions, and 95% CIs were presented for categorical variables. Statistical tests included ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis for continuous outcomes, Poisson regression for count-based outcomes (i.e., healthcare utilization visits), and Chi-square for dichotomous outcomes. The study identified 1763 IFX-naïve patients with IBD, and 785, 441, and 537 was indexed to RP, IFX-dyyb, and IFX-adba, respectively. Statistical differences were observed in IFX utilization measures related to dosing, adherence, and persistence. The proportion of days covered (PDC) during the 365-day follow-up period varied among the IFX groups: IFX-RP at 66%, IFX-dyyb at 60%, and IFX-abda at 69% (P value < .001). Persistence with the index IFX product during the 365-day follow-up period also varied: IFX-RP at 43%, IFX-dyyb at 32%, and IFX-abda at 51% (P value < .001). Healthcare utilization and laboratory findings were similar among the IFX groups. IFX utilization and laboratory patterns were clinically similar among the IFX biosimilars and RP groups, suggesting that providers did not modify their practice with biosimilars. Statistically significant differences in IFX utilization patterns are explained by formulary dynamics when the VANF product switched from IFX-dyyb to IFX-abda.

Impact of Value-Driven Healthcare Strategies for Biosimilar Adoption: The Singapore Story.

Healthcare sustainability is a global challenge. Various value-driven healthcare strategies have been implemented by Singapore's national health technology assessment (HTA) agency, the Agency for Care Effectiveness (ACE). Considering the high and growing expenditure on biologics, strategies have been implemented to drive the use of biosimilars. As Singapore has reached the 5-year mark since the subsidy listing of the first monoclonal antibody biosimilar infliximab, this review aimed to evaluate the impact of these strategies on the changes in adoption rates, utilisation, spending and cost savings for biosimilars in the public healthcare sector. A retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted using aggregated drug utilisation data from all public healthcare institutions. Five monoclonal antibodies with biosimilars, namely infliximab, adalimumab, trastuzumab, rituximab and bevacizumab, were included in this study. The outcomes evaluated were the monthly trends for utilisation volume, proportion attributed to biosimilar use, and drug spending up to December 2022. The simulated cost savings associated with biosimilar adoption were also reported. After subsidy implementation, an upward trend in biosimilar use and proportion attributed to biosimilar adoption was observed, while spending reduced substantially. The adoption rate of most biosimilars reached more than 95% within 1year of listing. Drugs with more than one approved biosimilar brand at the time of subsidy listing reported substantial price reductions of over 80%. Overall, spending for the five monoclonal antibodies have significantly reduced after biosimilar subsidy listing, with an estimated cumulative cost savings of $136 million over 5 years. Value-driven healthcare strategies implemented in Singapore's public healthcare institutions have contributed to high adoption rates of biosimilars and have improved affordable access through lower treatment costs. This in turn has led to significant cost savings to the healthcare system.

Impact of Infliximab Biosimilar (Ixifi®) Trough Levels on Disease Activity and Inflammatory Markers in Iraqi Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients

Background: Rheumatoid arthritis is an autoimmune inflammatory condition that impacts the small and larger joints. Ixifi® is a biosimilar medication derived from infliximab that exclusively targets Tumor Necrosis Factor-α. Serum Ixifi® trough concentration is necessary to manage disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis. Objective: Assess the impact of the Ixifi® trough level on disease activity and inflammatory biomarkers. Methods: A cross-sectional observational study was undertaken at Baghdad Teaching Hospital, involving forty-two patients diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis according to ACR/EULAR 2010 criteria. After 3 months after initiating therapy with Ixifi®, the serum concentrations of Ixifi®, as well as CDAI, ESR, and CRP biomarkers, were measured. Results: After 3 months of therapy with Ixifi®, the patients in the remission group had a higher concentration of Ixifi® compared to the mild, moderate, and severe disease activity groups. Ixifi® trough level in remission was 5.45 µg/ml, while in mild, moderate, and severe groups, it was 3.575 µg/ml, 2.2 µg/ml, and 0.66 µg/ml, respectively. The CDAI scores were in the severe group (26.0), moderate group (19.0), mild group (7.0), and remission group (2.0). Furthermore, the findings indicate an inverse correlation between the Ixifi® trough level and both ESR and CRP. Conclusions: A drop in Ixifi® levels leads to an increase in disease severity and inflammation, while high concentrations of Ixifi® decrease disease activity, ESR, and CRP.

Subcutaneous infliximab cut-off points in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Data from the ENEIDA registry.

Switching from the intravenous to the subcutaneous biosimilar infliximab (SC-IFX) has been shown to safely maintain clinical remission and increase drug levels in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC). The aim of this study was to evaluate long-term outcomes after switching from intravenous IFX (IV-IFX) to SC-IFX, the drug concentration thresholds for maintaining remission and other predictors for loss of response after the switch. Multicenter observational study involving CD and UC patients who were in clinical remission for at least 24 weeks and scheduled to switch from IV-IFX to SC-IFX. Two hundred and twenty patients were included [74 UC (34%) and 146 (66%) CD]. IV-IFX was administered for 52.5 months [range 25-89]. Pre-switch, 106 (49%) patients were receiving intensified IV-IFX. While SC-IFX levels significantly increased following the switch from IV to SC-IFX, clinical parameters, C-reactive protein and faecal calprotectin remained unchanged during follow-up. SC-IFX levels were significantly higher between patients receiving the standard IV-IFX dose than those with the intensified dose. Immunomodulator therapy at baseline and perianal disease had no effect on IFX trough levels, whereas higher body mass index was associated with increased levels. The suggested optimal SC-IFX cut-off concentration for clinical and biochemical remission based on ROC analysis was 12.2 μg/mL (AUC: 0.62) at week 12 and 13.2 μg/mL (AUC: 0.57) at week 52. Drug persistence was 92% at week 52, with a good safety profile. Switching from IV-IFX to SC-IFX safely maintains long-term remission in patients with CD and UC. In maintenance, the optimal cut-off point associated with remission was 12-13 μg/mL.

Patterns of Infliximab Biosimilar Uptake for Medicare, Medicaid, and Private Insurance from 2016 to 2022.

Biosimilars have the potential to reduce spending on biologic drugs, yet uptake has been slower than anticipated. We investigated how successive introductions of infliximab biosimilars influenced their adoption by major US insurance providers. Data came from the Rheumatology Informatics System for Effectiveness, a national registry with electronic health records from more than 1,100 US rheumatologists. All infliximab administrations (bio-originator or biosimilar) to patients aged ≥18 years from April 2016 to September 2022 were included. We used an interrupted time series to model the effect of each infliximab biosimilar release (infliximab-dyyb, November 2016; infliximab-adba, July 2017; and infliximab-axxq, July 2020) on uptake across Medicare, Medicaid, and private insurers. With the first and second biosimilar releases, biosimilar uptake rose slowly, with average annual increases of ≤5% from 2016 to June 2020 (Medicare 3.2%, Medicaid 5.2%, and private insurance 1.8%). With the third biosimilar release in July 2020, the average annual increase reached 13% for Medicaid and 16.4% for private insurance but remained low for Medicare (5.6%). By September 2022, uptake was higher for Medicaid (43.8%) and private insurance (38.5%) than for Medicare (24%). Our results have two key findings for policy makers. First, our results suggest that one or two biosimilars may not generate enough competition to speed adoption rates for biosimilars. Second, Medicare, which covers most patients receiving biologics nationally, had slow adoption rates even after the third biosimilar was introduced. Policy levers to speed adoption among Medicare beneficiaries are needed.

Anti-TNFα in inflammatory bowel disease: from originators to biosimilars.

The introduction of anti-tumor necrosis factor α (TNFα) biologics significantly innovated inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) treatment and increased medical costs. The recent expiration of patents of some anti-TNFα biologics (such as infliximab and adalimumab) facilitated the development of biosimilars. Comparable pharmacokinetic, efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity profiles between anti-TNFα originators and biosimilars were demonstrated in different studies. Anti-TNFα biosimilars hold promise for reducing the high cost of biologics and increasing patient access to biologics. In this review, we outline the current data on the use of anti-TNFα originators and biosimilars in patients with IBD, with a focus on the efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity profiles of infliximab and adalimumab biosimilars. The potential benefits, challenges, and future directions of anti-TNFα biosimilars are also discussed in the review.

Cost-Effectiveness of Biosimilars vs Leflunomide in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis

Among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who had an inadequate response to methotrexate, a treatment sequence initiated with biosimilar disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) provides better clinical efficacy compared with conventional synthetic DMARDs recommended by current treatment guidelines; but its cost-effectiveness evidence remains unclear. To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the treatment sequence initiated with biosimilar DMARDs after failure with methotrexate vs leflunomide and inform formulary listing decisions. This economic evaluation's cost-effectiveness analysis was performed at a Hong Kong public institution using the Markov disease transition model to simulate the lifetime disease progression and cost for patients with RA, using monetary value in 2022. Scenario and sensitivity analyses were performed to test the internal validity of the modeling conclusion. Participants included patients diagnosed with RA from 2000 to 2021 who were retrieved retrospectively from local electronic medical records to generate model input parameters. Statistical analysis was performed from January 2023 to March 2024. The model assesses 3 competing treatment sequences initiated with biosimilar infliximab (CT-P13), biosimilar adalimumab (ABP-501), and leflunomide; all used in combination with methotrexate. Lifetime health care cost and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of the simulated cohort. In total, 25 099 patients with RA were identified (mean [SD] age, 56 [17] years; 19 469 [72.7%] women). In the base-case analysis, the lifetime health care cost and QALYs for the treatment sequence initiated with leflunomide were US $154 632 and 14.82 QALYs, respectively; for biosimilar infliximab, they were US $152 326 and 15.35 QALYs, respectively; and for biosimilar adalimumab, they were US $145 419 and 15.55 QALYs, respectively. Both biosimilar sequences presented lower costs and greater QALYs than the leflunomide sequence. In the deterministic sensitivity analysis, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (US$/QALY) comparing biosimilar infliximab sequence vs leflunomide sequence and biosimilar adalimumab sequence vs leflunomide sequence ranged from -15 797 to -8615 and -9088 to 10 238, respectively, all below the predefined willingness-to-pay threshold (US $48 555/QALY gain). In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, the probability of treatment sequence initiated with leflunomide, biosimilar infliximab, and biosmilar adalimumab being cost-effective out of 10 000 iterations was 0%, 9%, and 91%, respectively. In this economic evaluation study, the treatment sequences initiated with biosimilar DMARDs were cost-effective compared with the treatment sequence initiated with leflunomide in managing patients with RA who experienced failure with the initial methotrexate treatment. These results suggest the need to update clinical treatment guidelines for initiating biosimilars immediately after the failure of methotrexate for patients with RA.

Benefits of Biosimilars in the Management of Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: An International Survey.

Background/Objectives: The development of biosimilar drugs has revolutionized the management of patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), significantly reducing healthcare costs. However, the impact of biosimilar availability on patient care is unknown. We conducted a survey to investigate the benefits of using biosimilars in patients with IBD. Methods: Physicians involved in the IBD care were invited to participate in an anonymous online survey. The questionnaire consisted of 42 questions addressing availability, cost, recommendations, and positioning regarding the use of biosimilars. Results: A total of 233 physicians (88.4% gastroenterologists) from 63 countries worldwide participated in the survey. Most respondents had >10 years of practice (202/233, 85.9%). Biosimilars were available in almost all cases (221, 94.8%), and over two-thirds of respondents had more than one biosimilar of adalimumab or infliximab on hospital formulary. In most cases, adalimumab and infliximab biosimilars had a reduced cost of at least 30% compared to the originators. The savings resulting from the use of biosimilars allowed physicians to improve patient care (3/233, 1.3%) or to improve research (2/233, 0.8%) in only a few cases. Interestingly, for about 50% of respondents, the cost of biologics was a limitation for patient access to therapy. For the majority of participants, the availability of biosimilars did not influence treatment decisions in Crohn's disease (70/165, 42.4%) and ulcerative colitis (83/165, 50.3%). Conclusions: The reduced cost of biosimilars compared to reference products is the main driver of choice in IBD. The impact of biosimilars of ustekinumab and vedolizumab in improving access to therapies and changing the treatment algorithm remains to be defined.

Randomised clinical trial: First-line infliximab biosimilar is cost-effective compared to conventional treatment in paediatric Crohn's disease.

Data on cost-effectiveness of first-line infliximab in paediatric patients with Crohn's disease are limited. Since biologics are increasingly prescribed and accompanied by high costs, this knowledge gap needs to be addressed. To investigate the cost-effectiveness of first-line infliximab compared to conventional treatment in children with moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease. We included patients from the Top-down Infliximab Study in Kids with Crohn's disease randomised controlled trial. Children with newly diagnosed moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease were treated with azathioprine maintenance and either five induction infliximab (biosimilar) infusions or conventional induction treatment (exclusive enteral nutrition or corticosteroids). Direct healthcare consumption and costs were obtained per patient until week 104. This included data on outpatient hospital visits, hospital admissions, drug costs, endoscopies and surgeries. The primary health outcome was the odds ratio of being in clinical remission (weighted paediatric Crohn's disease activity index<12.5) during 104 weeks. We included 89 patients (44 in the first-line infliximab group and 45 in the conventional treatment group). Mean direct healthcare costs per patient were €36,784 for first-line infliximab treatment and €36,874 for conventional treatment over 2 years (p = 0.981). The odds ratio of first-line infliximab versus conventional treatment to be in clinical remission over 104 weeks was 1.56 (95%CI 1.03-2.35, p = 0.036). First-line infliximab treatment resulted in higher odds of being in clinical remission without being more expensive, making it the dominant strategy over conventional treatment in the first 2 years after diagnosis in children with moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease. NCT02517684.

Outcomes of a mandatory non-medical switch of infliximab to a biosimilar for inflammatory bowel disease in British Columbia, Canada.

Despite infliximab biosimilars becoming widely used in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients, real-world non-medical switching is sparse. A biosimilar non-medical switch was launched in British Columbia in 2019, the first Canadian province to do so, from Remicade to an approved biosimilar (CT-P13 or SB2). This study aims to obtain real-world evidence evaluating the clinical outcomes of non-medical switching from Remicade to the infliximab biosimilars. This is a retrospective observational study of stable IBD patients from the IBD Centre of BC who underwent the non-medical infliximab switch. The primary outcome is treatment continuation at 12 ± 2 months post-switch. Secondary outcomes include frequency of loss of response, adverse events, and immunogenicity within the first 12 months post-switch. A control group of patients maintained on the originator served as a comparison. Patients in the biosimilar switch group (n = 264) and originator group (n = 99), show similar demographics and disease characteristics. There was no difference in infliximab continuation between the biosimilar group (94.9%) and the originator group (90.1%) (P = 0.18). Reasons for discontinuation of infliximab included loss of response (4.04% vs 4.91%), immunogenicity (1.01% vs 0.75%), or adverse effect (1.01% vs 2.3%) in the infliximab originator vs biosimilar switch group, respectively. Similarly, no differences in safety or efficacy were observed between patients switched to CT-P13 or SB2. Non-medical biosimilar switch of infliximab demonstrates similar clinical outcomes compared to originator molecule continuation for therapy of IBD. These data support the safety and efficacy of non-medical infliximab switching in IBD patients.

Characteristics and 6-Month Outcomes in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis Initiating Infliximab Biosimilar IFX-dyyb in a Real-World Setting.

Real-world studies describing biosimilar initiation or switching in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are limited. The aim of this study was to assess treatment patterns and effectiveness of real-world patients with RA initiating infliximab biosimilar IFX-dyyb (CT-P13; Inflectra®) in the USA. This observational study evaluated patients with RA from the CorEvitas RA Registry who initiated IFX-dyyb and had Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) recorded at baseline and 6months. The primary outcome was reaching low disease activity (LDA; CDAI ≤ 10) at 6months in patients with moderate or high disease activity (CDAI > 10) at baseline. Secondary outcomes were change at 6months in CDAI and certain patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Patient data were stratified by prior treatment: biologic/targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (tsDMARD)-naïve, reference infliximab (IFX-REF) or IFX biosimilar, or a non-IFX biologic or tsDMARD. Of 318 patients initiating IFX-dyyb, 176 had baseline and 6-month CDAI scores; 73 (41%) switched from IFX, 61 (35%) switched from another non-IFX/biologic/tsDMARD, 32 (18%) were naïve to biologics/tsDMARDs, and 10 (6%) switched from an IFX biosimilar. Among patients with moderate or high disease activity at baseline, 32.9% (95%CI 22.9, 42.9) achieved LDA at 6months. Mean 6-month change from baseline in CDAI was - 1.8 (95%CI - 3.3, - 0.3) overall; - 4.7 (- 7.6, - 1.7) in patients who switched from a non-IFX biologic/tsDMARD, - 4.1 (- 7.8, - 0.3) in biologic/tsDMARD-naïve patients, and 1.1 (- 0.4, 2.6) in patients who switched from IFX-REF/IFX biosimilar. Other clinical outcomes/PROs improved at 6months. Of the IFX-dyyb initiators, 68% remained on IFX-dyyb at 6months. In this real-world population of patients with RA initiating IFX-dyyb, the majority switched from IFX-REF or a non-IFX biologic/tsDMARD. CDAI remained stable in patients switching from IFX-REF/IFX biosimilar and improved in patients switching from a non-IFX biologic/tsDMARD and in biologic/tsDMARD-naïve patients.

Biologics in Focus: A Comprehensive Review of the Current Biological Therapies for Ulcerative Colitis in the United Arab Emirates (UAE)

Background: Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a relapsing–remitting inflammatory condition that has an increasing incidence across the world, including in the Middle East. Biological monoclonal antibody drugs (biologics) have been shown to be advantageous in treating UC. We undertook a review of the currently available biological and small-molecule therapies, with a particular emphasis on those currently licensed in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Methods: We conducted a literature search for studies on biological therapies using the PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase databases using a list of keywords that were generated following referral to existing treatment guidelines for UC. Papers looking at biological and small-molecule treatments for UC in adult populations were included. Pediatric, pregnancy, and cost-effectiveness studies were excluded. Results and Discussion: There are currently three classes of biologics (anti-tumor necrosis factors (anti-TNFs), anti-integrins, and anti-interleukins) and one class of small-molecule therapy (Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor) licensed for UC treatment in the UAE. Within the anti-TNF class, three medications have been approved: infliximab, adalimumab, and golimumab. For JAK inhibitors, there are two: tofacitinib and upadacitinib. There is only one licensed medication in the remaining classes: vedolizumab (anti-integrin) and ustekinumab (anti-interleukin). The length of studies varied from 6–8 weeks for induction studies and 52 weeks for maintenance studies. The studies demonstrated increased efficacy in these medications compared to placebos when clinical response, clinical remission, and other secondary measures such as mucosal healing were assessed following the induction and maintenance phases. Biosimilars of infliximab and adalimumab are also available for treating UC, and their safety and efficacy were compared to their biologic originators. Conclusions: The introduction of biologics has been proven to be beneficial for the treatment of UC. This review summarizes the efficacy and safety of each biological class in the treatment of the disease; however, biological drug registries and further studies are required to offer more insight into the comparative efficacy and safety of these agents.

Comparison of endoscopic healing and durability between infliximab originator and CT-P13 in pediatric patients with inflammatory bowel disease.

Favourable clinical data were published on the efficacy of CT-P13, the first biosimilar of infliximab (IFX), in pediatric inflammatory bowel disease (IBD); however, few studies have compared the effect on endoscopic healing (EH) and drug retention rate between the IFX originator and CT-P13. Therefore, we aimed to compare EH and the drug retention rate between the IFX originator and CT-P13. Children with Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC)/IBD-unclassified (IBD-U) at 22 medical centers were enrolled, with a retrospective review conducted at 1-year and last follow-up. Clinical remission, EH and drug retention rate were evaluated. We studied 416 pediatric patients with IBD: 77.4% had CD and 22.6% had UC/IBD-U. Among them, 255 (61.3%) received the IFX originator and 161 (38.7%) received CT-P13. No statistically significant differences were found between the IFX originator and CT-P13 in terms of corticosteroid-free remission and adverse events. At 1-year follow-up, EH rates were comparable between them (CD: P=0.902, UC: P=0.860). The estimated cumulative cessation rates were not significantly different between the two groups. In patients with CD, the drug retention rates were 66.1% in the IFX originator and 71.6% in the CT-P13 group at the maximum follow-up period (P >0.05). In patients with UC, the drug retention rates were 49.8% in the IFX originator and 56.3% in the CT-P13 group at the maximum follow-up period (P >0.05). The IFX originator and CT-P13 demonstrated comparable therapeutic response including EH, clinical remission, drug retention rate and safety in pediatric IBD.

Clinical outcomes and cost savings of a nonmedical switch to a biosimilar in children/young adults with inflammatory bowel disease.

The safety, efficacy, and cost savings associated with biosimilar medications are well established. However, a lack of pediatric data exists surrounding clinical outcomes when switching from an originator to a biosimilar. Our primary aim is to evaluate clinical outcomes following a nonmedical switch from the infliximab originator to a biosimilar in children and young adults with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).Our secondary aim is to estimate cost savings associated with this switch. A quality improvement project was implemented to establish safe switching protocols, then those patients who underwent a nonmedical switch from the infliximab originator to the biosimilar were retrospectively reviewed. Demographic data, physician global assessments (PGAs), and laboratory values were recorded 1 year pre- and post-switch. Continuation rates on the biosimilar were reported at 6 and 12 months. Cost savings were estimated using two different pricing models. Fifty-threepatients underwent a nonmedical switch. Laboratory values including inflammatory markers, infliximab levels, and PGAscores remained similar when assessed pre- and post-switch. No infusion reactions or antidrug antibody development occurred. Two patients reported psoriasis-like rashes. Five patients switched back to the originator during the study period. There were 379 biosimilar infusions completed with an estimated total cost savings of $11,260 (average sales price) and $566,223 (wholesale acquisition cost). Clinical remission rates, inflammatory laboratory markers, serious adverse events, infliximab levels, and antidrug antibodies remained similar after aone-time nonmedicalswitch to an infliximab biosimilar. Nonmedical switching to biosimilars resulted in significant cost savings.

INFLIXIMAB MARKET SHARE AND ASSOCIATED COST SAVINGS FOLLOWING BIOSIMILAR MARKET ENTRY

Abstract BACKGROUND Biologic medications have transformed treatment for autoimmune conditions, including inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), but have also contributed to rising healthcare expenditures in the United States (US). Biosimilars, which are highly similar in safety and efficacy to the originator biologic, were introduced to create competition and reduce cost. Limited studies exist evaluating the impact biosimilars have had on biologic market share and cost savings. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact infliximab biosimilars have had on the cost and market share of the infliximab originator product. METHODS Infliximab claims were reviewed and analyzed using the Merative MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters Database. Using only outpatient claims, both the infliximab originator and biosimilars were identified using Current Procedural Terminology codes from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2021. Patients with commercial insurance, ages 0 to 64 years, and receiving infliximab for any indication were included. The Medical Care Consumer Price Index was used to adjust for inflation to December 2021 dollars. Outcomes of interest included market share of all infliximab products, cost per infliximab infusion, and cost per vial (one vial=100 mg) of the medication. RESULTS There were 471,748 claims for infliximab infusions that met our inclusion criteria, with 42,100 unique patients, 55% female, and a median age of 40 (inter-quartile range (IQR) 26 – 52) years old at the time of medication initiation. Indications for infliximab products included IBD (67%), rheumatoid arthrtiis (18%), psoriasis (9%), ankylosing spondylitis (5%), other (4%), with some patients receiving infliximab for multiple indications. Utilization of infliximab biosimilars increased over time, reaching the highest utilization in December 2021, accounting for 24% of the market share. The median cost of the infliximab originator peaked at $1,491 per vial in December 2017, 13 months after market entry of the first biosimilar (infliximab-dyyb). The cost of the infliximab originator then decreased by 45% over time, reaching a low of $821 per vial in December 2021. Had infliximab biosimilars not been introduced to the market, the projected cost of the infliximab originator in December 2021 would have increased by 20% to $1793 per vial. Thus, infliximab biosimilars contributed to a theoretical decrease of 55% in the cost of infliximab originator during the time period studied. CONCLUSIONS The market share of infliximab biosimilars in the US has steadily increased since their introduction in 2016. The competition of infliximab biosimilars has contributed to the decrease in cost of both the infliximab originator and biosimilar products. Future studies are needed to determine if patients are seeing an out-of-pocket savings because of biosimilar introduction.