Domenico Motola1, Alberto Vaccheri2, Andrea Roncadori3, Monia Donati2, Giulia Bonaldo2, Anna Covezzoli3, Piera Polidori4, Stefano Bianchi5. 1. Unit of Pharmacology, Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Bologna, via Irnerio 48, 40126, Bologna, Italy. domenico.motola@unibo.it. 2. Unit of Pharmacology, Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Bologna, via Irnerio 48, 40126, Bologna, Italy. 3. CINECA - Interuniversity Consortium - Health Department, via Magnanelli 6/3, 40033, Casalecchio di Reno, BO, Italy. 4. Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Mediterranean Institute for Transplantation and Advanced Specialised Therapies (ISMETT), Palermo, Italy. 5. Department of Pharmacy, Azienda Ospedaliera Ospedali Riuniti Marche Nord, Pesaro, Italy.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this multicenter prospective study was to evaluate efficacy and safety of biosimilar erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) vs originator, based on data from clinical practice in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). METHODS: We collected data of the patients with diagnosis of CKD on conservative treatment from nine Italian structures. Patients were enrolled applying different exclusion criteria, and various individual parameters were registered at the beginning for descriptive analysis. Patients were treated with epoetin alfa, beta, and darbepoetin as originator and epoetin zeta as biosimilar. Hemoglobin levels have been analyzed at baseline and after 3, 6, and 12 months. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the results. RESULTS: At baseline, 47 patients were in the biosimilar group and 57 in the originator; the basal level of hemoglobin was similar between the groups (mean Hb 9.4 and 9.3 g/dL, respectively). Median age, weight, and comorbidities were almost comparable. After 3 months, 44 patients remained in the biosimilar group and 48 in the originator; hemoglobin increase was significantly greater in patients treated with biosimilar [absolute increase 1.6 vs 1.0 g/dL, p < 0.001]. After 6 and 12 months, number of patients fall furthermore. Hemoglobin levels increased more in the biosimilar group after 6 months (2.1 vs 1.1 g/dL, p < 0.001) and 12 months (2.0 vs 1.0 g/dL, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Biosimilar ESAs have similar risk/benefit profile compared to originators. Our data are in agreement with relevant scientific literature and, on the other hand, they are in contrast with common thought that considers biosimilar less efficacious and less safe than originators.
PURPOSE: The aim of this multicenter prospective study was to evaluate efficacy and safety of biosimilar erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) vs originator, based on data from clinical practice in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). METHODS: We collected data of the patients with diagnosis of CKD on conservative treatment from nine Italian structures. Patients were enrolled applying different exclusion criteria, and various individual parameters were registered at the beginning for descriptive analysis. Patients were treated with epoetin alfa, beta, and darbepoetin as originator and epoetin zeta as biosimilar. Hemoglobin levels have been analyzed at baseline and after 3, 6, and 12 months. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the results. RESULTS: At baseline, 47 patients were in the biosimilar group and 57 in the originator; the basal level of hemoglobin was similar between the groups (mean Hb 9.4 and 9.3 g/dL, respectively). Median age, weight, and comorbidities were almost comparable. After 3 months, 44 patients remained in the biosimilar group and 48 in the originator; hemoglobin increase was significantly greater in patients treated with biosimilar [absolute increase 1.6 vs 1.0 g/dL, p < 0.001]. After 6 and 12 months, number of patients fall furthermore. Hemoglobin levels increased more in the biosimilar group after 6 months (2.1 vs 1.1 g/dL, p < 0.001) and 12 months (2.0 vs 1.0 g/dL, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Biosimilar ESAs have similar risk/benefit profile compared to originators. Our data are in agreement with relevant scientific literature and, on the other hand, they are in contrast with common thought that considers biosimilar less efficacious and less safe than originators.
Authors: Matthew J Renwick; Kate Smolina; Emilie J Gladstone; Deirdre Weymann; Steven G Morgan Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2015-12-23 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Valderilio Azevedo; Brian Hassett; João Eurico Fonseca; Tatsuya Atsumi; Javier Coindreau; Ira Jacobs; Ehab Mahgoub; Julie O'Brien; Ena Singh; Steven Vicik; Brian Fitzpatrick Journal: Clin Rheumatol Date: 2016-10-12 Impact factor: 2.980
Authors: Stefan Krivoshiev; Vasil V Todorov; Jacek Manitius; Stanislaw Czekalski; Paul Scigalla; Rossen Koytchev Journal: Curr Med Res Opin Date: 2008-04-04 Impact factor: 2.580
Authors: Suetonia C Palmer; Valeria Saglimbene; Dimitris Mavridis; Georgia Salanti; Jonathan C Craig; Marcello Tonelli; Natasha Wiebe; Giovanni F M Strippoli Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2014-12-08