Gastroenterology Department, Hospital Universitario de La Princesa, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Princesa (IIS-Princesa), Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (UAM), Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBEREHD), Madrid, Spain.
Gastroenterology Department, Hospital Universitario de Navarra, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Navarra (IdiSNA), Pamplona, Spain.
Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2023 Jul;58(1):60-70. doi: 10.1111/apt.17525. Epub 2023 Apr 23.
Data on the outcomes after switching from adalimumab (ADA) originator to ADA biosimilar are limited. The aim was to compare the treatment persistence, clinical efficacy, and safety outcomes in inflammatory bowel disease patients who maintained ADA originator vs. those who switched to ADA biosimilar.
Patients receiving ADA originator who were in clinical remission at standard dose of ADA originator were included. Patients who maintained ADA originator formed the non-switch cohort (NSC), and those who switched to different ADA biosimilars constituted the switch cohort (SC). Clinical remission was defined as a Harvey-Bradshaw index ≤4 in Crohn's disease and a partial Mayo score ≤2 in ulcerative colitis. To control possible confounding effects on treatment discontinuation, an inverse probability treatment weighted proportional hazard Cox regression was performed.
Five hundred and twenty-four patients were included: 211 in the SC and 313 in the NSC. The median follow-up was 13 months in the SC and 24 months in the NSC (p < 0.001). The incidence rate of ADA discontinuation was 8% and 7% per patient-year in the SC and in the NSC, respectively (p > 0.05). In the multivariate analysis, switching from ADA originator to ADA biosimilar was not associated with therapy discontinuation. The incidence rate of relapse was 8% per patient-year in the SC and 6% per patient-year in the NSC (p > 0.05). Six percent of the patients had adverse events in the SC vs. 5% in the NSC (p > 0.05).
Switching to ADA biosimilar did not impair patients' outcomes in comparison with maintaining on the originator.
有关从阿达木单抗(ADA)原研药转换为 ADA 生物类似药后结局的数据有限。本研究旨在比较维持 ADA 原研药与转换为 ADA 生物类似药的炎症性肠病患者的治疗持续性、临床疗效和安全性结局。
纳入正在接受 ADA 原研药治疗且ADA 原研药标准剂量下处于临床缓解的患者。维持 ADA 原研药的患者构成非转换队列(NSC),转换为不同 ADA 生物类似药的患者构成转换队列(SC)。临床缓解定义为克罗恩病的 Harvey-Bradshaw 指数≤4 和溃疡性结肠炎的部分 Mayo 评分≤2。为了控制治疗中断可能存在的混杂影响,采用逆概率治疗加权比例风险 Cox 回归进行分析。
共纳入 524 例患者:SC 组 211 例,NSC 组 313 例。SC 组的中位随访时间为 13 个月,NSC 组为 24 个月(p<0.001)。SC 组和 NSC 组的 ADA 停药发生率分别为 8%和 7%/患者年(p>0.05)。多变量分析显示,从 ADA 原研药转换为 ADA 生物类似药与治疗中断无关。SC 组的复发发生率为 8%/患者年,NSC 组为 6%/患者年(p>0.05)。SC 组有 6%的患者发生不良事件,NSC 组有 5%的患者发生不良事件(p>0.05)。
与维持 ADA 原研药相比,转换为 ADA 生物类似药并未损害患者的结局。