Sato So, Sasabuchi Yusuke, Okada Akira, Yasunaga Hideo
Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Health Economics, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Department of Real-world Evidence, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2025 Jan;91(1):143-150. doi: 10.1111/bcp.16243. Epub 2024 Sep 8.
Biosimilar products have clinical characteristics similar to those of brand-name products and can reduce medical costs. However, the use of biosimilar products for osteoporosis treatments remains limited due to concerns regarding its safety and efficacy. We aimed to clarify the effectiveness and safety of the biosimilar teriparatide compared with those of the reference product using the incidence of new fractures and osteosarcoma as outcomes in osteoporosis patients.
This study used the DeSC database, which contains medical claims data for various insurers in Japan. We included patients with osteoporosis aged ≥65 years who newly received either biosimilar teriparatide or the reference products between April 2019 and November 2022. Competing risk analyses were performed with adjustments for patient characteristics. The primary and secondary outcomes were the occurrence of new fractures and osteosarcoma, respectively.
Among 45 861 included patients, 3613 and 42 248 were in the biosimilar and reference product groups, respectively. The median follow-up duration was 439 days. New fractures occurred in 6.7% of patients. Cumulative incidence function curves showed similar risks of new fractures over time in both groups. The cause-specific hazard ratio for new fractures was 0.95 (95% confidence interval: 0.82-1.11) for the biosimilar group compared with that of the reference product group. The incidence of osteosarcoma did not differ significantly between the groups (P = .559).
The biosimilar teriparatide showed effectiveness and safety comparable with those of the reference products in treating osteoporosis patients. Our results suggest that clinicians need not hesitate to prescribe biosimilar teriparatide for osteoporosis patients.
生物类似药产品具有与品牌药相似的临床特征,且能降低医疗成本。然而,由于对其安全性和有效性的担忧,生物类似药在骨质疏松症治疗中的应用仍然有限。我们旨在以新发骨折和骨肉瘤的发生率为指标,阐明生物类似药特立帕肽与参比产品相比在骨质疏松症患者中的有效性和安全性。
本研究使用了DeSC数据库,该数据库包含日本多家保险公司的医疗理赔数据。我们纳入了2019年4月至2022年11月期间新接受生物类似药特立帕肽或参比产品治疗的65岁及以上骨质疏松症患者。对患者特征进行调整后进行竞争风险分析。主要和次要结局分别是新发骨折和骨肉瘤的发生情况。
在纳入的45861例患者中,生物类似药组和参比产品组分别有3613例和422,48例。中位随访时间为439天。6.7%的患者发生了新发骨折。累积发病率函数曲线显示两组随时间推移新发骨折的风险相似。与参比产品组相比,生物类似药组新发骨折的病因特异性风险比为0.95(95%置信区间:0.82-1.11)。两组骨肉瘤的发生率无显著差异(P = 0.559)。
生物类似药特立帕肽在治疗骨质疏松症患者时显示出与参比产品相当的有效性和安全性。我们的结果表明,临床医生在为骨质疏松症患者开生物类似药特立帕肽时无需犹豫。