Background Adalimumab (ADA) biosimilars have entered the therapeutic armamentarium of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), allowing for the treatment of a greater number of patients for their reduced cost than the originator. However, comparative data on the efficacy and safety of the various ADA biosimilars remains scarce. We compare the efficacy and safety of ADA biosimilars SB5, APB501, GP2017, and MSB11022 in treating IBD outpatients in a real-life Italian setting. Methods A retrospective analysis was performed on consecutive IBD outpatients with complete clinical, laboratory, and endoscopic data. Clinical activity was measured using the Mayo score in ulcerative colitis (UC) and the Harvey-Bradshaw Index in Crohn's disease (CD). The primary endpoints were the following: (1) induction of remission in patients new to biologics and patients new to ADA but previously exposed to other anti-tumor necrosis factor agents or other biologics; (2) maintenance of remission in patients switched from the ADA originator to an ADA biosimilar; and (3) safety of various biosimilars. Results A total of 533 patients were enrolled according to the inclusion criteria: 162 patients with UC and 371 patients with CD. Clinical remission was obtained in 79.6% of patients new to biologics and 59.2% of patients new to ADA but not to other biologics; clinical remission was maintained in 81.0% of patients switched from the originator, and adverse events were recorded in 6.7% of patients. There was no significant difference between the 4 ADA biosimilars for each predetermined endpoint. Conclusions Adalimumab biosimilars are effective and safe in IBD treatment, both in new patients and in patients switched from the ADA originator. No difference in efficacy and safety was found between ADA biosimilars.Lay Summary We treated 533 IBD patients with adalimumab (ADA) biosimilars SB5, APB501, GP2017, and MSB11022. No differences between these 4 ADA biosimilars were found for reaching remission in naive patients, maintaining remission for nonmedical switching, clinical response, steroid-free remission, surgery rate, mucosal healing, or safety.

Comparison of Performances of Adalimumab Biosimilars SB5, APB501, GP2017, and MSB11022 in Treating Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: A Real-Life, Multicenter, Observational Study / Tursi, Antonio; Mocci, Giammarco; Allegretta, Leonardo; Aragona, Giovanni; Bianco, Maria Antonia; Colucci, Raffaele; Cuomo, Antonio; Della Valle, Nicola; Ferronato, Antonio; Forti, Giacomo; Gaiani, Federica; Giorgetti, Gianmarco; Graziani, Maria Giovanna; Lofano, Katia; Lorenzetti, Roberto; Larussa, Tiziana; Penna, Antonio; Pica, Roberta; Pranzo, Giuseppe; Rodino', Stefano; Scarcelli, Antonella; Zampaletta, Costantino; Bassotti, Gabrio; Cazzato, Alessia Immacolata; Chiri, Stefania; Clemente, Valeria; Cocco, Andrea; De' Angelis, Gianluigi; Donnarumma, Laura; Faggiani, Roberto; Graziosi, Camilla; Le Grazie, Marco; Luzza, Francesco; Meucci, Costantino; Monterubbianesi, Rita; Pagnini, Cristiano; Perazzo, Patrizia; Picchio, Marcello; Sacco, Rodolfo; Sebkova, Ladislava; Serio, Mariaelena; Napolitano, Daniele; Pugliese, Daniela; Scaldaferri, Franco; Schiavoni, Elisa; Turchini, Laura; Armuzzi, Alessandro; Elisei, Walter; Maconi, Giovanni; Papa, Alfredo. - In: INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASES. - ISSN 1078-0998. - (2022). [10.1093/ibd/izac092]

Comparison of Performances of Adalimumab Biosimilars SB5, APB501, GP2017, and MSB11022 in Treating Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: A Real-Life, Multicenter, Observational Study

Aragona, Giovanni;Gaiani, Federica;De' Angelis, Gianluigi;
2022

Abstract

Background Adalimumab (ADA) biosimilars have entered the therapeutic armamentarium of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), allowing for the treatment of a greater number of patients for their reduced cost than the originator. However, comparative data on the efficacy and safety of the various ADA biosimilars remains scarce. We compare the efficacy and safety of ADA biosimilars SB5, APB501, GP2017, and MSB11022 in treating IBD outpatients in a real-life Italian setting. Methods A retrospective analysis was performed on consecutive IBD outpatients with complete clinical, laboratory, and endoscopic data. Clinical activity was measured using the Mayo score in ulcerative colitis (UC) and the Harvey-Bradshaw Index in Crohn's disease (CD). The primary endpoints were the following: (1) induction of remission in patients new to biologics and patients new to ADA but previously exposed to other anti-tumor necrosis factor agents or other biologics; (2) maintenance of remission in patients switched from the ADA originator to an ADA biosimilar; and (3) safety of various biosimilars. Results A total of 533 patients were enrolled according to the inclusion criteria: 162 patients with UC and 371 patients with CD. Clinical remission was obtained in 79.6% of patients new to biologics and 59.2% of patients new to ADA but not to other biologics; clinical remission was maintained in 81.0% of patients switched from the originator, and adverse events were recorded in 6.7% of patients. There was no significant difference between the 4 ADA biosimilars for each predetermined endpoint. Conclusions Adalimumab biosimilars are effective and safe in IBD treatment, both in new patients and in patients switched from the ADA originator. No difference in efficacy and safety was found between ADA biosimilars.Lay Summary We treated 533 IBD patients with adalimumab (ADA) biosimilars SB5, APB501, GP2017, and MSB11022. No differences between these 4 ADA biosimilars were found for reaching remission in naive patients, maintaining remission for nonmedical switching, clinical response, steroid-free remission, surgery rate, mucosal healing, or safety.
Comparison of Performances of Adalimumab Biosimilars SB5, APB501, GP2017, and MSB11022 in Treating Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: A Real-Life, Multicenter, Observational Study / Tursi, Antonio; Mocci, Giammarco; Allegretta, Leonardo; Aragona, Giovanni; Bianco, Maria Antonia; Colucci, Raffaele; Cuomo, Antonio; Della Valle, Nicola; Ferronato, Antonio; Forti, Giacomo; Gaiani, Federica; Giorgetti, Gianmarco; Graziani, Maria Giovanna; Lofano, Katia; Lorenzetti, Roberto; Larussa, Tiziana; Penna, Antonio; Pica, Roberta; Pranzo, Giuseppe; Rodino', Stefano; Scarcelli, Antonella; Zampaletta, Costantino; Bassotti, Gabrio; Cazzato, Alessia Immacolata; Chiri, Stefania; Clemente, Valeria; Cocco, Andrea; De' Angelis, Gianluigi; Donnarumma, Laura; Faggiani, Roberto; Graziosi, Camilla; Le Grazie, Marco; Luzza, Francesco; Meucci, Costantino; Monterubbianesi, Rita; Pagnini, Cristiano; Perazzo, Patrizia; Picchio, Marcello; Sacco, Rodolfo; Sebkova, Ladislava; Serio, Mariaelena; Napolitano, Daniele; Pugliese, Daniela; Scaldaferri, Franco; Schiavoni, Elisa; Turchini, Laura; Armuzzi, Alessandro; Elisei, Walter; Maconi, Giovanni; Papa, Alfredo. - In: INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASES. - ISSN 1078-0998. - (2022). [10.1093/ibd/izac092]
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11381/2930271
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 2
social impact