Post-switch Effectiveness of Etanercept Biosimilar Versus Continued Etanercept in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients with Stable Disease: A Prospective Multinational Observational Study.

To better inform clinicians about the use of etanercept biosimilar (SB4) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), COMPANION-B, a prospective real-world observational study, evaluated the effectiveness of the voluntary switch from originator (etanercept, ETN) to SB4 in patients with stable RA (low-disease activity/remission). The study recruited adult patients (18 years or older) with RA (2010 American College of Rheumatology criteria) prescribed ETN as their first or second biologic for at least 6 months across 14 sites in Canada and five in Australia. Patients had stable disease (Disease Activity Score-28 using erythrocyte sedimentation rate [DAS28-ESR] less than 3.2) at enrollment with no evidence of flare within the previous 3 months. Concomitant disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) were permitted. Patients could elect to continue ETN or voluntarily switch to SB4 in consultation with their doctors. The primary effectiveness measure was the proportion of patients with disease worsening (defined as a DAS28-ESR increase of at least 1.2 from baseline and minimum score of at least 3.2 or a defined modification in RA treatment) during 12 months of follow-up. The secondary effectiveness measure was the proportion of patients with disease worsening at month 6. Serious adverse events (SAEs) and non-serious adverse reactions (NSARs) were recorded. Of 163 patients enrolled, 109 elected to continue on ETN and 54 switched to SB4; 65.8% of patients received non-biologic DMARD(s), 52.6% methotrexate, and 10.5% oral corticosteroid(s). At month 12, the proportion of patients with disease worsening was comparable in the ETN group (22.8% [95% CI 15.0-32.2]) and SB4 group (17.6% [95% CI 8.4-30.9]). Similarly, the proportions of patients with disease worsening were also comparable at month 6 (ETN: 7.9% [95% CI 3.5-15.0]; SB4: 7.8% [95% CI 2.2-18.9]). SAEs were low and similar across both groups (ETN: 8.7%; SB4: 5.7%). NSARs were slightly higher in the SB4 vs. ETN group (13.2% vs. 2.9%). SB4 demonstrated comparable effectiveness to ETN over 12 months in patients with stable RA who voluntarily switched to the biosimilar in a real-world setting.

Pope J ，Hall S ，Bombardier C ，Haraoui B ，Jones G ，Naik L ，Etzel CJ ，Ramey DR ，Infante R ，Miguelez M ，Falcao S ，Sahakian S ，Wu D ... -  《-》

Open-Label, Non-Mandatory Transitioning From Originator Etanercept to Biosimilar SB4: Six-Month Results From a Controlled Cohort Study.

To evaluate the effects of non-mandatory transitioning from the originator biologic drug etanercept (ETN) to its biosimilar, SB4, on drug survival and effectiveness in a controlled cohort study of patients with an inflammatory rheumatic disease. In 2016, 642 patients were asked to transition their treatment from originator ETN to biosimilar SB4 by a structured communication strategy with opt-out option. Patients who consented to switch to SB4 were considered eligible for inclusion in the transition cohort, while patients being treated with originator ETN in 2014 were recruited as the historical cohort. Drug survival was compared between the 2 cohorts using Cox regression analyses, which were adjusted for age, sex, diagnosis, ETN treatment duration, ETN dose interval, conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug usage, and C-reactive protein (CRP) level, with a robust variance estimator applied to account for repeated subjects (i.e., patients who were included in both the transition cohort and the historical cohort). Adjusted differences in the 6-month change in CRP level, Disease Activity Score in 28 joints using CRP level (DAS28-CRP), and Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index were also assessed. Of the 642 ETN-treated patients, 635 (99%) agreed to transition from originator ETN to biosimilar SB4, of whom 625 patients (433 with rheumatoid arthritis, 128 with psoriatic arthritis, and 64 with ankylosing spondylitis) were included in the transition cohort, and 600 ETN-treated patients from 2014 were included in the historical cohort. The crude treatment persistence rate for biosimilar SB4 over 6 months was 90% (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 88-93%), compared to a 6-month treatment persistence rate of 92% (95% CI 90-94%) for originator ETN. Patients in the transition cohort, compared to the historical cohort, had a statistically significantly higher relative risk of treatment discontinuation (adjusted hazard ratio 1.57, 95% CI 1.05-2.36) and showed smaller decreases in the CRP level (adjusted difference 1.8, 95% CI 0.3-3.2) and DAS28-CRP (adjusted difference 0.15, 95% CI 0.05-0.25) over 6 months. Non-mandatory transitioning from originator ETN to biosimilar SB4 using a specifically designed communication strategy resulted in a slightly lower 6-month treatment persistence rate and smaller decreases in disease activity in the transition cohort compared to the historical cohort, but these differences were not considered clinically relevant.

Tweehuysen L ，Huiskes VJB ，van den Bemt BJF ，Vriezekolk JE ，Teerenstra S ，van den Hoogen FHJ ，van den Ende CH ，den Broeder AA ... -  《-》

A phase III randomised, double-blind, parallel-group study comparing SB4 with etanercept reference product in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate therapy.

To compare the efficacy and safety of SB4 (an etanercept biosimilar) with reference product etanercept (ETN) in patients with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) despite methotrexate (MTX) therapy. This is a phase III, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, multicentre study with a 24-week primary endpoint. Patients with moderate to severe RA despite MTX treatment were randomised to receive weekly dose of 50 mg of subcutaneous SB4 or ETN. The primary endpoint was the American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response at week 24. Other efficacy endpoints as well as safety, immunogenicity and pharmacokinetic parameters were also measured. 596 patients were randomised to either SB4 (N=299) or ETN (N=297). The ACR20 response rate at week 24 in the per-protocol set was 78.1% for SB4 and 80.3% for ETN. The 95% CI of the adjusted treatment difference was -9.41% to 4.98%, which is completely contained within the predefined equivalence margin of -15% to 15%, indicating therapeutic equivalence between SB4 and ETN. Other efficacy endpoints and pharmacokinetic endpoints were comparable. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was comparable (55.2% vs 58.2%), and the incidence of antidrug antibody development up to week 24 was lower in SB4 compared with ETN (0.7% vs 13.1%). SB4 was shown to be equivalent with ETN in terms of efficacy at week 24. SB4 was well tolerated with a lower immunogenicity profile. The safety profile of SB4 was comparable with that of ETN. NCT01895309, EudraCT 2012-005026-30.

Emery P ，Vencovský J ，Sylwestrzak A ，Leszczyński P ，Porawska W ，Baranauskaite A ，Tseluyko V ，Zhdan VM ，Stasiuk B ，Milasiene R ，Barrera Rodriguez AA ，Cheong SY ，Ghil J ... -  《-》

Switch from reference etanercept to SDZ ETN, an etanercept biosimilar, does not impact efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of etanercept in patients with moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis: 48-week results from the phase III, randomized, double-blin

Jaworski J ，Matucci-Cerinic M ，Schulze-Koops H ，Buch MH ，Kucharz EJ ，Allanore Y ，Kavanaugh A ，Young P ，Babic G ... -  《-》

Comparative effectiveness of etanercept originator and biosimilar for treating rheumatoid arthritis: implications for cost-savings.

This study aimed to assess the comparative effectiveness of the etanercept (ETN) originator (Enbrel) and ETN biosimilar SB4 (Brenzys) as first-line treatment in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), while also exploring the potential cost-savings associated with this approach in Australia. Clinical data were obtained from the Optimising Patient outcomes in rheumatoLogy Australian real-world data set. Adult patients with RA who had initiated treatment with the ETN originator or biosimilar as their first-recorded biologic or targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug between 1 April 2017 and 31 December 2020 were included. Treatment persistence was analysed using survival analysis. Cost-savings were estimated based on data reported by the Australian National Prescribing Service MedicineWise. Propensity score matching followed by inverse probability of treatment weighting selected patients taking originator (n = 209) or biosimilar (n = 141) with similar baseline characteristics and eliminated small differences in baseline disease activity. The median time for 50% of the patients to stop treatment was 19.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 14.7-36.4 months) for the originator and 22.4 months (95% CI, 15.0-33.1 months) for the biosimilar (P = 0.95). As a result of pricing policies established by the Australian Government, introduction of the ETN biosimilar would have resulted in a cost-savings of over AU$9.5 million for 1 year of treatment for the patients reported in this study. Treatment persistence using either ETN originator or biosimilar was similar. The cost of all brands of ETN markedly reduced upon listing of the ETN biosimilar, resulting in significant savings for the Australian Government.

Deakin CT ，Littlejohn GO ，Griffiths H ，Ciciriello S ，O'Sullivan C ，Smith T ，Youssef P ，Bird P ，OPAL consortium ... -  《-》