Ciara L Freeman1, Laurie Sehn2. 1. BC Cancer, 600 W 10th Avenue, Vancouver, BC, Canada. Ciara.freeman@bccancer.bc.ca. 2. BC Cancer, 600 W 10th Avenue, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Since its initial approval in 1997, rituximab has revolutionized the treatment of CD20-positive lymphoproliferative disorders. Now, over two decades later, second-generation molecules are emerging that may have key biological advantages compared to rituximab, as well as biosimilars that may be more cost-effective. Clinicians, health policy makers, and payers will now need to critically appraise the available evidence for these competitors and decide which anti-CD20 to use. RECENT FINDINGS: Evidence has emerged directly comparing rituximab IV to a subcutaneous preparation, and head-to-head comparisons of rituximab versus next-generation anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies have also been published. Trials comparing rituximab with newly developed biosimilars have also allowed for registration of these agents. In this review, we will present an overview of anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody development, discuss the mechanistic and clinical evidence for rituximab, as well as the novel compounds, and provide commentary on the possible advantages and limitations of these agents.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Since its initial approval in 1997, rituximab has revolutionized the treatment of CD20-positive lymphoproliferative disorders. Now, over two decades later, second-generation molecules are emerging that may have key biological advantages compared to rituximab, as well as biosimilars that may be more cost-effective. Clinicians, health policy makers, and payers will now need to critically appraise the available evidence for these competitors and decide which anti-CD20 to use. RECENT FINDINGS: Evidence has emerged directly comparing rituximab IV to a subcutaneous preparation, and head-to-head comparisons of rituximab versus next-generation anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies have also been published. Trials comparing rituximab with newly developed biosimilars have also allowed for registration of these agents. In this review, we will present an overview of anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody development, discuss the mechanistic and clinical evidence for rituximab, as well as the novel compounds, and provide commentary on the possible advantages and limitations of these agents.
Authors: H T Claude Chan; David Hughes; Ruth R French; Alison L Tutt; Claire A Walshe; Jessica L Teeling; Martin J Glennie; Mark S Cragg Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2003-09-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Valentin Goede; Kirsten Fischer; Raymonde Busch; Anja Engelke; Barbara Eichhorst; Clemens M Wendtner; Tatiana Chagorova; Javier de la Serna; Marie-Sarah Dilhuydy; Thomas Illmer; Stephen Opat; Carolyn J Owen; Olga Samoylova; Karl-Anton Kreuzer; Stephan Stilgenbauer; Hartmut Döhner; Anton W Langerak; Matthias Ritgen; Michael Kneba; Elina Asikanius; Kathryn Humphrey; Michael Wenger; Michael Hallek Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2014-01-08 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Carla Casulo; Michelle Byrtek; Keith L Dawson; Xiaolei Zhou; Charles M Farber; Christopher R Flowers; John D Hainsworth; Matthew J Maurer; James R Cerhan; Brian K Link; Andrew D Zelenetz; Jonathan W Friedberg Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2015-06-29 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Gilles Salles; Martin Barrett; Robin Foà; Joerg Maurer; Susan O'Brien; Nancy Valente; Michael Wenger; David G Maloney Journal: Adv Ther Date: 2017-10-05 Impact factor: 3.845