Search

A meta-analysis using data from 3 phase 1 studies evaluated the pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of Sandoz biosimilar versus US- and EU-reference pegfilgrastim. The studies included a single-dose, double-blind, 3-arm, parallel-group study (study 1); a single-dose, double-blind, 2-way crossover study (study 2); and a single-dose, double-blind, 3-way, 6-sequence crossover study (study 3). Healthy male and female subjects were randomized to receive the proposed biosimilar (all studies), US-reference biologic (studies 1 and 3), or EU-reference biologic (studies 1, 2, and 3). For PK parameters (area under the serum concentration-time curve from time of dosing and extrapolated to infinity, area under the serum concentration-time curve from the time of dosing to the last measurable concentration, and maximum observed serum concentration) and PD parameters (absolute neutrophil count area under the effect curve from the time of dosing to the last measurable concentration and maximum measured absolute neutrophil count) geometric mean ratios and 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for treatment comparisons were calculated using the meta-analysis approach with a fixed-effects model. PK/PD biosimilarity was concluded if the 90%CIs were within the equivalence margins of 0.80 to 1.25. The 90%CIs for the geometric mean ratios for the PK/PD parameters were all within the equivalence margins. Safety and tolerability were similar between the proposed biosimilar and the US- and EU-reference pegfilgrastim in healthy subjects. This meta-analysis of 3 phase 1 studies supports PK/PD similarity of Sandoz biosimilar pegfilgrastim to US- and EU-reference pegfilgrastim. No clinically meaningful differences in safety or tolerability were observed., (© 2021 Sandoz Biopharmaceuticals. Clinical Pharmacology in Drug Development published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Clinical Pharmacology.)

Aims: Recombinant PEGylated human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (pegfilgrastim) is indicated for the reduction of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia and prevention of febrile neutropenia. Biosimilar pegfilgrastim is expected to reduce the financial burden of this complication of chemotherapy. The aim of this study was to demonstrate biosimilarity between Sandoz biosimilar pegfilgrastim and its US- and EU-approved reference biologics., Methods: Phase I, randomized, double-blind, single-dose, 3-period, 6-sequence cross-over, multicentre study to evaluate the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, safety and immunogenicity of Sandoz biosimilar pegfilgrastim with US- and EU-references in healthy adults., Results: Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic similarity was demonstrated between the 3 biologics, as the 90% confidence interval for all primary pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic endpoint comparisons were contained within the predefined similarity margins of 0.80-1.25. Safety, immunogenicity and tolerability were also similar., Conclusions: Sandoz biosimilar pegfilgrastim demonstrated pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic similarity to both US- and EU-reference biologics. No meaningful differences in safety, local tolerability and immunogenicity were identified., (© 2020 The Authors. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Pharmacological Society.)

Aims: This study aimed to demonstrate that the pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) profile of Sandoz proposed biosimilar pegfilgrastim (LA-EP2006) matches reference pegfilgrastim (Neulasta ® ) in healthy subjects. Safety and immunogenicity were also assessed., Methods: The phase I, randomized, double-blind, two-period crossover study consisted of two treatment periods separated by an 8-week washout period. Healthy subjects aged 18-45 were randomized to either proposed biosimilar/reference pegfilgrastim or reference pegfilgrastim/proposed biosimilar. Proposed biosimilar and reference pegfilgrastim were administered on Day 1 of each treatment period (single 6 mg subcutaneous injection). Blood samples for PK/PD analysis were taken predose and ≤336 h postdose. PK/PD similarity was claimed if 90% (PK) and 95% (PD) confidence intervals (CI) for geometric mean ratios of the area under the serum concentration-time curve (AUC) from time of dosing and extrapolated to infinity (AUC 0-inf ), or to the last measurable concentration (AUC 0-last ), maximum observed serum concentration (C max ), absolute neutrophil count (ANC) area under the effect curve from the time of dosing to the last measurable concentration (AUEC 0-last ) and ANC maximum effect attributable to the therapy under investigation (E max ) were completely contained within the predefined margin (0.8 to 1.25)., Results: Overall, 169 subjects completed the study. PK/PD similarity was demonstrated; 90% CIs of geometric mean ratio of proposed biosimilar/reference for PK: AUC 0-inf (1.0559-1.2244), AUC 0-last (1.0607-1.2328), C max (1.0312-1.1909) and 95% CIs for PD (ANC): AUEC 0-last (0.9948-1.0366), E max (0.9737-1.0169) were completely contained within predefined margin of 0.8 to 1.25. Both biologics had similar safety profiles, were well tolerated and had low incidence of anti-drug antibodies. No neutralizing or clinically relevant antibodies were detected., Conclusions: PK/PD similarity of Sandoz proposed biosimilar pegfilgrastim and reference pegfilgrastim was confirmed. No clinically meaningful differences in safety, tolerability and immunogenicity were observed in healthy subjects., (© 2018 The British Pharmacological Society.)

Background: Following the functional and physicochemical characterization of a proposed biosimilar, comparative clinical studies help to confirm biosimilarity by demonstrating similar safety and efficacy to the reference product in a sensitive patient population., Patients and Methods: LA-EP2006 is a proposed biosimilar that has been developed for pegfilgrastim, a long-acting form of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor for the prevention of neutropenia. The current analysis reports data pooled from two independent, multinational, prospective, randomized, controlled, double-blind phase III studies of similar design comparing the safety and efficacy of reference pegfilgrastim with LA-EP2006 in patients with breast cancer receiving myelotoxic (neo)adjuvant TAC (docetaxel, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide) chemotherapy and requiring granulocyte colony-stimulating factor., Results: A total of 624 patients were randomized in the PROTECT-1 and PROTECT-2 studies (NCT01735175; NCT01516736) (LA-EP2006: n = 314; reference: n = 310). Baseline characteristics of patients were well balanced across treatment groups. The primary end point, mean duration of severe neutropenia in the first chemotherapy cycle was similar in both the LA-EP2006 and reference groups (1.05 ± 1.055 days versus 1.01 ± 0.958 days), with a treatment difference of - 0.04 days [95% confidence interval (CI): -0.19 to 0.11] that met the equivalence criteria (the 95% CI were within the defined margin of ±1 day). Secondary end points, such as the nadir of absolute neutrophil count and the incidence of febrile neutropenia, were also similar between LA-EP2006 and reference pegfilgrastim. The safety and tolerability profile of LA-EP2006 was similar to that observed with reference pegfilgrastim, and there were no reports of neutralizing antibodies., Conclusions: This pooled analysis confirms, as a part of totality of evidence approach, that the proposed biosimilar pegfilgrastim LA-EP2006 has a comparable efficacy and safety profile to reference pegfilgrastim in patients with breast cancer receiving TAC chemotherapy., Clinical Trial Numbers: NCT01735175 and NCT01516736., (© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology.)

Aim: This is a pooled subgroup analysis of Asian patients enrolled in two Phase III confirmatory studies comparing proposed biosimilar LA-EP2006 with reference pegfilgrastim in women receiving chemotherapy for breast cancer., Patients & Methods: Women were randomized to LA-EP2006 (n = 90) or reference (n = 84) pegfilgrastim (Neulasta ® , Amgen, Inc., CA, USA) for ≤6 cycles of TAC chemotherapy. Primary end point was duration of severe neutropenia during Cycle 1 (number of consecutive days with absolute neutrophil count <0.5 × 10 9 /l) with equivalence confirmed if 95% CIs were within a ±1-day margin., Results: Mean duration of severe neutropenia (days) in Cycle 1 was 1.36 ± 0.98 (LA-EP2006) versus 1.35 ± 1.06 (reference) (difference 0.01 days; 95% CI: -0.30-0.32, indicating equivalence)., Conclusion: LA-EP2006 showed similar clinical efficacy and safety compared with reference pegfilgrastim.

Background: Pegfilgrastim is widely used for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia. In highly regulated markets, there are currently no approved biosimilars of pegfilgrastim. Pegfilgrastim Randomized Oncology (Supportive Care) Trial to Evaluate Comparative Treatment (PROTECT-2) was a confirmatory efficacy and safety study designed to compare proposed biosimilar LA-EP2006 with reference pegfilgrastim (Neulasta, Amgen) in early-stage breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant or neoadjuvant myelosuppressive chemotherapy., Methods: A total of 308 patients were randomized to LA-EP2006 or reference pegfilgrastim. Each patient received TAC (intravenous docetaxel 75 mg/m(2), doxorubicin 50 mg/m(2), and cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m(2)) on day 1 of each cycle, for six or more cycles. Pegfilgrastim (LA-EP2006 or reference) was given subcutaneously (6 mg in 0.6 mL) on day 2 of each cycle. The primary endpoint was duration of severe neutropenia (DSN) during cycle 1 (number of consecutive days with an absolute neutrophil count <0.5 × 10(9)/L), with equivalence confirmed if 90% and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were within a 1-day margin., Results: Baseline characteristics were well balanced. DSN was equivalent between groups at mean ± SD 1.36 ± 1.13 (LA-EP2006, n = 155) and 1.19 ± 0.98 (reference, n = 153) in cycle 1. With a treatment difference (reference minus LA-EP2006) of -0.16 days (90% CI -0.36 to 0.04; 95% CI -0.40 to 0.08), LA-EP2006 was equivalent to reference pegfilgrastim. Secondary efficacy parameters were similar between groups during cycle 1 and across cycles. Safety profiles were also similar between groups. No neutralizing antibodies against pegfilgrastim, filgrastim, or polyethylene glycol were detected., Conclusion: LA-EP2006 and reference pegfilgrastim were therapeutically equivalent and comparable regarding efficacy and safety in the prevention of neutropenia in patients with early-stage breast cancer receiving TAC., Implications for Practice: The granulocyte colony-stimulating factor pegfilgrastim is widely used for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia. Biosimilars are biologics with similar quality, safety, and efficacy to a reference product that may increase the affordability of treatment compared with their reference compounds. There are currently no approved biosimilars of pegfilgrastim in highly regulated markets. No previous phase III studies have been performed with LA-EP2006. PROTECT-2 was conducted to confirm the similarity of the proposed biosimilar LA-EP2006 to pegfilgrastim. Biosimilar pegfilgrastim (LA-EP2006) may benefit oncology patients by offering increased access to biological treatments that may improve clinical outcomes. This means that patients could potentially be treated prophylactically with biologics rather than only after complications have occurred., (©AlphaMed Press.)

Aim: This randomized, double-blind trial compared proposed biosimilar LA-EP2006 with reference pegfilgrastim in women receiving chemotherapy for breast cancer (PROTECT-1)., Patients & Methods: Women (≥18 years) were randomized to receive LA-EP2006 (n = 159) or reference (n = 157) pegfilgrastim (Neulasta(®), Amgen) for ≤6 cycles of (neo)-adjuvant TAC chemotherapy. Primary end point was duration of severe neutropenia (DSN) during cycle 1 (number of consecutive days with absolute neutrophil count <0.5 × 10(9)/l) with equivalence confirmed if 90% and 95% CIs were within a ±1 day margin., Results: For DSN, LA-EP2006 was equivalent to reference (difference: 0.07 days; 90% CI: -0.09-0.23; 95% CI: -0.12-0.26)., Conclusion: LA-EP2006 and reference pegfilgrastim showed no clinically meaningful differences regarding efficacy and safety in breast cancer patients receiving chemotherapy.

Background: Biosimilars of filgrastim are in widespread clinical use in Europe. This phase III study compares biosimilar filgrastim (EP2006), with the US-licensed reference product, Neupogen(®), in breast cancer patients receiving (neo)adjuvant myelosuppressive chemotherapy (TAC)., Patients and Methods: A total of 218 patients receiving 5 µg/kg/day filgrastim over six chemotherapy cycles were randomized 1:1:1:1 into four arms. Two arms received only one product (nonalternating), biosimilar or reference, and two arms (alternating) received alternating treatments during each cycle (biosimilar then reference or vice versa). The primary end point was duration of severe neutropenia (DSN) during cycle 1., Results: The baseline characteristics were balanced between the four treatment arms. Noninferiority of biosimilar versus the reference was demonstrated: DSN (days) in cycle 1 was 1.17 ± 1.11 (biosimilar, N = 101) and 1.20 ± 1.02 (reference, N = 103), 97.5% confidence interval lower boundary for the difference was -0.26 days (above the predefined limit of -1 day). No clinically meaningful differences were observed regarding any other efficacy parameter: incidence of febrile neutropenia (FN); hospitalization due to FN; incidence of infections; depth and time of absolute neutrophil count (ANC) nadir and time to ANC recovery during cycle 1 and across all cycles. The pattern and frequency of adverse events were similar across all treatments., Conclusion: This study demonstrates that biosimilar and the reference filgrastim are similar with no clinically meaningful differences regarding efficacy and safety in prevention of severe neutropenia. Biosimilar filgrastim could represent an important alternative to the reference product, potentially benefiting public health by increasing access to filgrastim treatment., Study Number: NCT01519700., (© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology.)