OBJECTIVES: Recently, the infliximab biosimilar (CT-P13) received market authorisation for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), allowing cost benefits when switching to CT-P13. We aim to assess the efficacy and safety of switching from originator infliximab to CT-P13 for new and existing patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Treatment response, remission, primary and secondary loss of response rates, and adverse events in patients who initiated infliximab originator in the 12 months pre-switch (n = 53) were compared with the patients who initiated CT-P13 in the 12 months post-switch (n = 69). Sustained responses were compared for existing infliximab originator patients who switched to CT-P13 (n = 191) and those who continued with the originator (n = 19). RESULTS: There was no difference in remission (58.1% vs. 47.4%, p = .37), response (12.6% vs. 10.5%, p = .80), secondary loss of response (24.6% vs. 42.1%, p = .10), or adverse events (4.7% vs. 0% p = 1.0) between those who switched to CT-P13 and those who continued infliximab originator. There was no difference in remission (42.0% vs. 26.4%, p = .074), response (21.7% vs. 22.6%, p = .91), primary non-response (5.8% vs. 15.1%, p = .09), secondary loss of response (21.7% vs. 22.6%, p = .91), or adverse events (8.7% vs. 11.3%, p = .63) in those who initiated CT-P13 compared with infliximab originator. CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in the efficacy and safety of infliximab originator and CT-P13 during the first 12 months after switching.
OBJECTIVES: Recently, the infliximab biosimilar (CT-P13) received market authorisation for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), allowing cost benefits when switching to CT-P13. We aim to assess the efficacy and safety of switching from originator infliximab to CT-P13 for new and existing patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Treatment response, remission, primary and secondary loss of response rates, and adverse events in patients who initiated infliximab originator in the 12 months pre-switch (n = 53) were compared with the patients who initiated CT-P13 in the 12 months post-switch (n = 69). Sustained responses were compared for existing infliximab originator patients who switched to CT-P13 (n = 191) and those who continued with the originator (n = 19). RESULTS: There was no difference in remission (58.1% vs. 47.4%, p = .37), response (12.6% vs. 10.5%, p = .80), secondary loss of response (24.6% vs. 42.1%, p = .10), or adverse events (4.7% vs. 0% p = 1.0) between those who switched to CT-P13 and those who continued infliximab originator. There was no difference in remission (42.0% vs. 26.4%, p = .074), response (21.7% vs. 22.6%, p = .91), primary non-response (5.8% vs. 15.1%, p = .09), secondary loss of response (21.7% vs. 22.6%, p = .91), or adverse events (8.7% vs. 11.3%, p = .63) in those who initiated CT-P13 compared with infliximab originator. CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in the efficacy and safety of infliximab originator and CT-P13 during the first 12 months after switching.
Authors: Mahmoud Ahmed Ebada; Abdelmagid M Elmatboly; Ahmed Said Ali; Ahmed Mohamed Ibrahim; Notila Fayed; Ahmed Faisal Faisal; Souad Alkanj Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2019-09-06 Impact factor: 2.571
Authors: Nikolas Plevris; Gareth R Jones; Philip W Jenkinson; Mathew Lyons; Cher S Chuah; Lynne M Merchant; Rebecca J Pattenden; Eleanor F Watson; Gwo-Tzer Ho; Colin L Noble; Shahida Din; Alan G Shand; Ian D Arnott; Charlie W Lees Journal: Dig Dis Sci Date: 2018-12-07 Impact factor: 3.487
Authors: Rosa Giuliani; Josep Tabernero; Fatima Cardoso; Keith Hanson McGregor; Malvika Vyas; Elisabeth G E de Vries Journal: ESMO Open Date: 2019-03-06