A Prospective, Active-controlled, Randomized, Double-blind, Multicenter, Phase III Study to Compare the Safety and Efficacy of Biosimilar Denosumab vs Reference Denosumab in the Treatment of Postmenopausal Osteoporosis.

Denosumab, a human monoclonal antibody that exhibits strong affinity and specificity for the receptor activator of nuclear factor-kappa B ligand (RANK-L), is essential in regulating bone turnover. Its inhibition of RANK-L decreases bone resorption by preventing the development, function, and survival of osteoclasts. The objective of the study was to evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety of biosimilar denosumab with the reference product, Prolia (denosumab), in Indian women suffering from postmenopausal osteoporosis. This phase III study was a prospective, active-controlled, randomized, double-blind trial that included postmenopausal women diagnosed with osteoporosis. Participants were randomly allocated in a 2:1 ratio to receive either the biosimilar denosumab (Treatment A) or the reference denosumab (Prolia®; Treatment B). All participants also received daily supplementation of 500 international units (IU) of vitamin D3 and 1000 mg calcium. The primary outcomes measured were the bone mineral density (BMD) percentage change at the lumbar spine and the neck of femur, while the secondary endpoint assessed changes in biomarkers from baseline at months 6 and 12. The lumbar spine BMD percentage change for group A vs group B from baseline to month 6 was 5.69 ± 0.88 (p < 0.0001) vs 5.08 ± 1.19 (p < 0.0001), and at 12 months was 7.26 ± 1.05 (p < 0.0001) vs 7.31 ± 1.40 (p < 0.0001), demonstrating equivalent efficacy. Both treatment groups showed statistically significant improvement in femoral neck BMD at 12 months. No statistically significant difference was noted in the ln-transformed primary pharmacokinetic parameters, including C-max, AUC0-120d, and AUC0-∞. Biosimilar denosumab was comparable to reference denosumab with respect to its efficacy, safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics, and immunogenicity in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis. Thus, biosimilar denosumab is expected to improve the quality of life in osteoporotic patients at affordable prices.

Paul T ，Garg B ，Kapoor N ，Patil V ，Kachnerkar N ，Shembalkar J ，Purohit S ，Maheshwari S ，Maheshwari S ，Yadav A ，Cherian JJ ，Agrawal A ，Basu K ，Tripathy SK ，Pongde AB ，Goni V ，Markade P ，Makane A ，Tiwaskar M ，Cherian KE ，Rane Y ，Shahavi V ，Poojary V ，Somani R ，Gondane A ，Aiwale A ，Pawar D ，Pawar R ，Sharma A ... -  《-》

Efficacy and safety of the biosimilar denosumab candidate (Arylia) compared to the reference product (Prolia®) in postmenopausal osteoporosis: a phase III, randomized, two-armed, double-blind, parallel, active-controlled, and noninferiority clinical trial

Osteoporosis is a global health concern with an increasing prevalence worldwide. Denosumab is an antiresoptive agent that has been demonstrated to be effective and safe in osteoporotic patients. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of the biosimilar denosumab candidate (Arylia) to the originator product (Prolia®) in postmenopausal osteoporotic patients. In this randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, noninferiority trial, postmenopausal osteoporotic patients received 60 mg of subcutaneous Arylia or Prolia® at months 0, 6, and 12 and were followed up for 18 months. The primary endpoint was the noninferiority of the biosimilar product to the reference product in the percentage change of bone mineral density (BMD) in 18 months at the lumbar spine (L1-L4), total hip, and femoral neck. The secondary endpoints were safety assessment, the incidence of new vertebral fractures, and the trend of bone turnover markers (BTMs). A total of 190 patients were randomized to receive either biosimilar (n = 95) or reference (n = 95) denosumab. In the per-protocol (PP) analysis, the lower limits of the 95% two-sided confidence intervals of the difference between Arylia and Prolia® in increasing BMD were greater than the predetermined noninferiority margin of - 1.78 at the lumbar spine, total hip, and femoral neck sites (mean differences [95% CIs] of 0.39 [- 1.34 to 2.11], 0.04 [- 1.61 to 1.69], and 0.41 [- 1.58 to 2.40], respectively). The two products were also comparable in terms of safety, new vertebral fractures, and trend of BTMs. The efficacy of the biosimilar denosumab was shown to be noninferior to that of the reference denosumab, with a comparable safety profile at 18 months. ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03293108 ; Registration date: 2017-09-19.

Jamshidi A ，Vojdanian M ，Soroush M ，Akbarian M ，Aghaei M ，Hajiabbasi A ，Mirfeizi Z ，Khabbazi A ，Alishiri G ，Haghighi A ，Salimzadeh A ，Karimzadeh H ，Shirani F ，Fard MRH ，Nazarinia M ，Soroosh S ，Anjidani N ，Gharibdoost F ... -  《-》

Equivalence trial of proposed denosumab biosimilar GP2411 and reference denosumab in postmenopausal osteoporosis: the ROSALIA study.

Denosumab is a monoclonal antibody used to reduce risk of fractures in osteoporosis. ROSALIA was a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, integrated phase I/phase III study comparing the efficacy, pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), immunogenicity, and safety of proposed biosimilar denosumab GP2411 with reference denosumab (REF-DMAb) (Prolia®; Amgen). Postmenopausal women with osteoporosis were randomized 1:1 to 2 60-mg doses of GP2411 or REF-DMAb, one at study start and one at week 26. At week 52, the REF-DMAb group was re-randomized 1:1 to a third dose of REF-DMAb or switch to GP2411. The primary efficacy endpoint was percentage change from baseline (%CfB) in LS-BMD at week 52. Secondary efficacy endpoints were %CfB in LS-BMD, FN-BMD, and TH-BMD at weeks 26 and 78 (and week 52 for FN-BMD and TH-BMD). Primary PK and PD endpoints were the area under the serum concentration-time curve extrapolated to infinity and maximum drug serum concentration at week 26, and the area under the effect-time curve of the %CfB in serum CTX at week 26. Secondary PK and PD endpoints included drug serum concentrations and %CfB in serum CTX and P1NP during the study period. Similar efficacy was demonstrated at week 52, with 95% CIs of the difference in %CfB in LS-BMD between treatment groups fully contained within prespecified equivalence margins. Similarity in PK and PD was demonstrated at week 26. Immunogenicity was similar between groups and was not impacted by treatment switch. The rate of new vertebral fractures was comparable. Treatment-emergent adverse events were comparable between groups (63.6% [GP2411/GP2411]; 76.0% [REF-DMAb/REF-DMAb]; 76.6% [REF-DMAb/GP2411]). In conclusion, ROSALIA showed similar efficacy, PK and PD, and comparable safety and immunogenicity of GP2411 to REF-DMAb in postmenopausal osteoporosis.

Jeka S ，Dokoupilová E ，Kivitz A ，Żuchowski P ，Vogg B ，Krivtsova N ，Sekhar S ，Banerjee S ，Schwebig A ，Poetzl J ，Body JJ ，Eastell R ... -  《-》

Denosumab biosimilar in postmenopausal osteoporotic women: A randomized, assessor-blind, active-controlled clinical trial.

Singh I ，Jose V ，Patel R ，Arora S ... -  《-》

Efficacy and safety of candidate biosimilar CT-P41 versus reference denosumab: a double-blind, randomized, active-controlled, Phase 3 trial in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.

This 78-week (18-month) study conducted in 479 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis evaluated the efficacy, pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, safety, and immunogenicity of candidate biosimilar CT-P41 relative to US reference denosumab. CT-P41 had equivalent efficacy and pharmacodynamics to US-denosumab, with similar pharmacokinetics and comparable safety and immunogenicity profiles. To demonstrate equivalence of candidate biosimilar CT-P41 and US reference denosumab (US-denosumab) in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. This 78-week (18-month), double-blind, randomized, active-controlled Phase 3 study (NCT04757376) comprised two treatment periods (TPs). In TPI, patients (N = 479) were randomized 1:1 to 60 mg subcutaneous CT-P41 or US-denosumab. At Week 52, those who had received CT-P41 in TPI continued to do so. Those who had received US-denosumab were randomized (1:1) to continue treatment or switch to CT-P41 in TPII. The primary efficacy endpoint was percent change from baseline in lumbar spine bone mineral density at Week 52. Efficacy equivalence was concluded if associated 95% confidence intervals (CI) for least squares (LS) mean group differences fell within ± 1.503%. The primary pharmacodynamic (PD) endpoint was area under the effect curve for serum carboxy-terminal cross-linking telopeptide of type I collagen through the first 26 weeks, with an equivalence margin of 80-125% (for 95% CIs associated with geometric LS mean ratios). Equivalence was demonstrated for CT-P41 and US-denosumab with respect to primary efficacy (LS mean difference [95% CI]: - 0.139 [- 0.826, 0.548] in the full analysis set and - 0.280 [- 0.973, 0.414] in the per-protocol set) and PD (geometric LS mean ratio [95% CI]: 94.94 [90.75, 99.32]) endpoints. Secondary efficacy, PD, pharmacokinetics, and safety results were comparable among all groups up to Week 78, including after transitioning to CT-P41 from US-denosumab. CT-P41 was equivalent to US-denosumab in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis, with respect to primary efficacy and PD endpoints.

Reginster JY ，Czerwinski E ，Wilk K ，Borowy P ，Strzelecka A ，Budlewski T ，Janowska-Maus M ，Szymanowski K ，Kwiatek J ，Postol S ，Põder A ，Supronik J ，Kim S ，Suh J ，Han N ，Kim N ，Bae S ，Silverman SL ... -  《-》