-
The American Journal of Managed Care Mar 2023With the rapid decline in average sales price of reference pegfilgrastim products due to biosimilar competition, health care institutions and payers may grapple with...
With the rapid decline in average sales price of reference pegfilgrastim products due to biosimilar competition, health care institutions and payers may grapple with coverage of Neulasta Onpro.
Topics: Humans; Filgrastim; Polyethylene Glycols; Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals
PubMed: 36947018
DOI: 10.37765/ajmc.2023.89331 -
British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology Jun 2020Recombinant PEGylated human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (pegfilgrastim) is indicated for the reduction of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia and prevention of... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
A large multicentre, randomized, double-blind, cross-over study in healthy volunteers to compare pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and safety of a pegfilgrastim biosimilar with its US- and EU-reference biologics.
AIMS
Recombinant PEGylated human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (pegfilgrastim) is indicated for the reduction of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia and prevention of febrile neutropenia. Biosimilar pegfilgrastim is expected to reduce the financial burden of this complication of chemotherapy. The aim of this study was to demonstrate biosimilarity between Sandoz biosimilar pegfilgrastim and its US- and EU-approved reference biologics.
METHODS
Phase I, randomized, double-blind, single-dose, 3-period, 6-sequence cross-over, multicentre study to evaluate the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, safety and immunogenicity of Sandoz biosimilar pegfilgrastim with US- and EU-references in healthy adults.
RESULTS
Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic similarity was demonstrated between the 3 biologics, as the 90% confidence interval for all primary pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic endpoint comparisons were contained within the predefined similarity margins of 0.80-1.25. Safety, immunogenicity and tolerability were also similar.
CONCLUSIONS
Sandoz biosimilar pegfilgrastim demonstrated pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic similarity to both US- and EU-reference biologics. No meaningful differences in safety, local tolerability and immunogenicity were identified.
Topics: Adult; Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals; Cross-Over Studies; Double-Blind Method; Filgrastim; Healthy Volunteers; Humans; Polyethylene Glycols
PubMed: 32022282
DOI: 10.1111/bcp.14226 -
Advances in Therapy Jul 2020PF-06881894 is a proposed biosimilar to pegfilgrastim (Neulasta). This study evaluated the pharmacodynamic/pharmacokinetic (PD/PK) equivalence, immunogenicity, and... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study
PF-06881894, a Proposed Biosimilar to Pegfilgrastim, Versus US-Licensed and EU-Approved Pegfilgrastim Reference Products (Neulasta): Pharmacodynamics, Pharmacokinetics, Immunogenicity, and Safety of Single or Multiple Subcutaneous Doses in Healthy Volunteers.
INTRODUCTION
PF-06881894 is a proposed biosimilar to pegfilgrastim (Neulasta). This study evaluated the pharmacodynamic/pharmacokinetic (PD/PK) equivalence, immunogenicity, and safety of PF-06881894 vs pegfilgrastim reference products (US- and EU-Neulasta) in healthy volunteers.
METHODS
A phase 1, open-label, randomized, crossover study was conducted to assess the pharmacologic equivalence and safety of a single 6-mg dose of PF-06881894, pegfilgrastim-US, and pegfilgrastim-EU. The primary PD endpoints were area under the effect-versus-time curve for absolute neutrophil count (ANC) from dose administration to 288 h postdose, and maximum observed ANC value among subjects confirmed negative for anti-pegfilgrastim antibodies. Primary PK variables included area under the serum pegfilgrastim-versus-time curve from the time of dose administration to time infinity and maximum observed serum pegfilgrastim concentration. A second phase 1, open-label, randomized (1:1), parallel-group, non-inferiority study was conducted to assess the immunogenicity and safety of multiple 6-mg doses of PF-06881894 versus pegfilgrastim-US. The primary endpoint for the immunogenicity study was the proportion of subjects with both negative baseline and confirmed positive postdose anti-pegfilgrastim antibodies at any time during the study.
RESULTS
Across the single- and multiple-dose studies (N = 153 and N = 420 treated subjects, respectively), demographics for age (18-65 years), male gender (n = 264/573), and white race (n = 423/573) were similar. Three-way PD/PK equivalence of PF-06881894, pegfilgrastim-US, and pegfilgrastim-EU was demonstrated with the primary PD endpoints and primary PK variables being completely contained within the predefined 90% confidence interval acceptance limits (80-125%). The non-inferiority of PF-06881894 versus pegfilgrastim-US in terms of immunogenicity was established according to the prespecified non-inferiority margin (≤10%). Overall, there were no clinically meaningful differences in safety profiles among or between study groups.
CONCLUSIONS
Single-dose PF-06881894 demonstrated PD/PK equivalence and comparable safety with US- and EU-pegfilgrastim reference products. Multiple-dose PF-06881894 demonstrated immunogenicity non-inferiority to pegfilgrastim-US with comparable safety. Both studies contributed to the totality of evidence supporting biosimilarity.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT02629289; NCT03273842 (C1221005).
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Asian People; Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals; Cross-Over Studies; Double-Blind Method; Female; Filgrastim; Healthy Volunteers; Humans; Male; Neutrophils; Polyethylene Glycols; Therapeutic Equivalency; Young Adult
PubMed: 32524499
DOI: 10.1007/s12325-020-01387-x -
BMC Cancer Aug 2019Febrile neutropenia (FN) is a serious complication of myelosuppressive chemotherapy. Clinical practice guidelines recommend routine prophylactic coverage with...
BACKGROUND
Febrile neutropenia (FN) is a serious complication of myelosuppressive chemotherapy. Clinical practice guidelines recommend routine prophylactic coverage with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF)-such as pegfilgrastim-for most patients receiving chemotherapy with an intermediate to high risk for FN. Patterns of pegfilgrastim prophylaxis during the chemotherapy course and associated FN risks in US clinical practice have not been well characterized.
METHODS
A retrospective cohort design and data from two commercial healthcare claims repositories (01/2010-03/2016) and Medicare Claims Research Identifiable Files (01/2007-09/2015) were employed. Study population included patients who had non-metastatic breast cancer or non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and received intermediate/high-risk regimens. Pegfilgrastim prophylaxis use and FN incidence were ascertained in each chemotherapy cycle, and all cycles were pooled for analyses. Adjusted odds ratios for FN were estimated for patients who did versus did not receive pegfilgrastim prophylaxis in that cycle.
RESULTS
Study population included 50,778 commercial patients who received 190,622 cycles of chemotherapy and 71,037 Medicare patients who received 271,944 cycles. In cycle 1, 33% of commercial patients and 28% of Medicare patients did not receive pegfilgrastim prophylaxis, and adjusted odds of FN were 2.6 (95% CI 2.3-2.8) and 1.6 (1.5-1.7), respectively, versus those who received pegfilgrastim prophylaxis. In cycle 2, 28% (commercial) and 26% (Medicare) did not receive pegfilgrastim prophylaxis; corresponding adjusted FN odds were comparably elevated (1.9 [1.6-2.2] and 1.6 [1.5-1.8]). Results in subsequent cycles were similar. Across all cycles, 15% of commercial patients and 23% of Medicare patients did not receive pegfilgrastim prophylaxis despite having FN in a prior cycle, and prior FN increased odds of subsequent FN by 2.1-2.4 times.
CONCLUSIONS
Notwithstanding clinical practice guidelines, a large minority of patients did not receive G-CSF prophylaxis, and FN incidence was substantially higher among this subset of the population. Appropriate use of pegfilgrastim prophylaxis may reduce patient exposure to this potentially fatal but largely preventable complication of myelosuppressive chemotherapy.
Topics: Aged; Chemoprevention; Chemotherapy-Induced Febrile Neutropenia; Disease Management; Female; Filgrastim; Hematologic Agents; Humans; Incidence; Male; Middle Aged; Polyethylene Glycols; Practice Patterns, Physicians'; Retrospective Studies; Risk; United States
PubMed: 31399079
DOI: 10.1186/s12885-019-6010-9 -
Journal of the Advanced Practitioner in... 2017A male patient aged 67 years with a 2-year history of refractory anemia and myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) with del(5q) started lenalidomide (Revlimid) treatment as a... (Review)
Review
A male patient aged 67 years with a 2-year history of refractory anemia and myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) with del(5q) started lenalidomide (Revlimid) treatment as a participant in the MDS-001 trial (List et al., 2005). At the time of the study, this patient had been transfusion-dependent since 2001, and at study entry he had received a total of 12 units of red blood cells (RBCs). The patient started lenalidomide at 25 mg daily for 21 days of each 28-day cycle on April 2, 2002. (Please note that as a result of subsequent trials, the approved starting dose for lenalidomide in patients with del[5q] MDS is 10 mg.) The patient developed treatment-related pancytopenia in the first 3 weeks of treatment (see Figure on next page). On day 24, lenalidomide was withheld. Platelet and white blood cell (WBC) counts were recovered during a 21-day period, and treatment was resumed with lenalidomide at 10 mg daily. During this initial dose interruption, the patient's hemoglobin level improved. He achieved RBC-transfusion independence (TI) during week 5 of treatment-his last RBC transfusion was on April 22, 2002. Bone marrow (BM) analysis, including fluorescence in situ hybridization, after 3 months of therapy, did not show the del(5q) abnormality. A repeat BM analysis after 57 months of treatment revealed minimal residual dyspoiesis, normal metaphase cytogenetics, and normal cell morphology. Subsequent BM biopsies showed transient trisomy 8 abnormalities but no del(5q) abnormality. The patient required one additional dose reduction during the first year of treatment. The patient did not require hospitalization during lenalidomide treatment but did have a history of seasonal allergies and a propensity for acute sinusitis. He received a single dose of pegfilgrastim (Neulasta) and a short course of antibiotics for active infections, generally one course of antibiotics per year. This patient continued on lenalidomide at 5 mg daily for 21 days of every 28-day cycle without further dose reduction. The patient achieved durable RBC-TI and continued to receive treatment for more than 11 years. The levels of hemoglobin, platelets, and WBCs for an 11-year period in this patient are shown in the Figure. This patient had one normal platelet count in 11 years of lenalidomide treatment but no bleeding episodes. The average platelet count in the 11-year period was 67 × 1,000/∝L (normal range, 150-425 × 1,000/∝L). Similarly, the WBC count remained below normal, with an average of 3.1 × 1,000/∝L (normal range, 3.4-10.4 × 1,000/∝L). He remained active and continued working as an aerospace engineer until age 75. This case demonstrates how effective management of cytopenias, through dose interruptions and modifications in the early weeks of treatment, helps to enable long-term lenalidomide treatment and a high quality of life. Despite the persistence of moderate, asymptomatic cytopenias, the patient was able to remain on lenalidomide therapy and maintained RBC-TI for more than 11 years. The patient died on October 4, 2014, at age 79.5, due to coronary artery disease and heart failure.
PubMed: 30333934
DOI: No ID Found -
Pharmacology Research & Perspectives Apr 2020MSB11455 is a proposed biosimilar to the currently licensed reference pegfilgrastim (Neulasta ). This study was designed primarily to compare the immunogenicity of... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
Immunogenicity and safety of a proposed pegfilgrastim biosimilar MSB11455 versus the reference pegfilgrastim Neulasta in healthy subjects: A randomized, double-blind trial.
MSB11455 is a proposed biosimilar to the currently licensed reference pegfilgrastim (Neulasta ). This study was designed primarily to compare the immunogenicity of MSB11455 and Neulasta . As secondary objectives, the safety and tolerability of MSB11455 and Neulasta were also compared. Healthy adult subjects were randomized to either MSB11455 or Neulasta , stratified by antipolyethylene glycol (PEG) antibody status at screening and study site. Subjects received a single subcutaneous dose of MSB11455 or Neulasta (both 6 mg/0.6 mL) on day 1 of each of two study periods (same product in both periods), separated by a washout of 28-35 days. Immunogenicity samples were taken predose and up to day 84 post-first dose. Noninferiority was confirmed if the upper limit of the exact one-sided adjusted 95% confidence interval (CI) for the difference in antidrug antibody (ADA)-positive rates was < 10%. Safety was assessed throughout the study. Overall, 336 subjects were randomized and treated (N = 168 in each group). Noninferiority of MSB11455 over Neulasta was demonstrated for immunogenicity; the difference in confirmed treatment-induced ADA-positive rate between MSB11455 and Neulasta was -0.6% (upper limit of the exact one-sided adjusted 95% CI: 6.25%). ADAs were mostly directed against the PEG moiety of pegfilgrastim. No filgrastim-specific neutralizing antibodies were detected in either treatment group. Safety and tolerability were as expected for pegfilgrastim, and comparable between treatments. This study supports and strengthens the available evidence for the biosimilarity of MSB11455 to Neulasta .
Topics: Adult; Antibodies; Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals; Double-Blind Method; Female; Filgrastim; Healthy Volunteers; Humans; Male; Polyethylene Glycols; Young Adult
PubMed: 32333641
DOI: 10.1002/prp2.578 -
Cureus Jul 2020A biosimilar is a biochemical product like another already approved biologic agent, known as the reference agent. To be endorsed by the Food and Drug Administration... (Review)
Review
A biosimilar is a biochemical product like another already approved biologic agent, known as the reference agent. To be endorsed by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), biosimilars must demonstrate that they are as safe and effective as their reference item, with no clinical distinction. Humanized monoclonal antibodies (mAb) are revolutionizing the treatment of gastrointestinal and gynecologic malignancies. Bevacizumab, trastuzumab, cetuximab, rituximab, and pegfilgrastim are the most widely used mAb products with oncologic indications. Due to the complexities of the regulatory system, it may take time for anti-cancer biosimilars to play a significant game-changing role. Over the last decade, the use of generics has saved billions of dollars every year, and it is expected that biosimilars will soon prove to be a cost-effective alternative and can play an important role in driving down healthcare costs globally. In this review, we provide a critical appraisal of biosimilars with an emphasis on bevacizumab-awwb (Avastin) and its clinico-pharmacologic characteristics, safety, efficacy, interchangeability, regulatory and oncologic perspectives, and overall clinical perception.
PubMed: 32832297
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.9300 -
Scientific Reports Feb 2024Ramucirumab plus docetaxel (RD) can cause febrile neutropenia (FN), which frequently requires the prophylactic administration of pegfilgrastim. However, the effects of...
Ramucirumab plus docetaxel (RD) can cause febrile neutropenia (FN), which frequently requires the prophylactic administration of pegfilgrastim. However, the effects of prophylactic pegfilgrastim on FN prevention, therapeutic efficacy, and prognosis after RD have not been fully evaluated in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Two hundred and eighty-eight patients with advanced NSCLC who received RD as second-line therapy after platinum-based chemotherapy plus PD-1 blockade were included. Patients were divided into groups with and without prophylactic pegfilgrastim, and adverse events, efficacy, and prognosis were compared between both groups. Of the 288 patients, 247 received prophylactic pegfilgrastim and 41 did not. The frequency of grade 3/4 neutropenia was 62 patients (25.1%) in the pegfilgrastim group and 28 (68.3%) in the control group (p < 0.001). The frequency of FN was 25 patients (10.1%) in the pegfilgrastim group and 10 (24.4%) in the control group (p = 0.018). The objective response rate was 31.2% and 14.6% in the pegfilgrastim and control groups (p = 0.039), respectively. The disease control rate was 72.9% in the pegfilgrastim group and 51.2% in the control group (p = 0.009). Median progression free survival was 4.3 months in the pegfilgrastim group and 2.5 months in the control group (p = 0.002). The median overall survival was 12.8 and 8.1 months in the pegfilgrastim and control groups (p = 0.004), respectively. Prophylactic pegfilgrastim for RD reduced the frequency of grade 3/4 neutropenia and febrile neutropenia and did not appear to be detrimental to patient outcome RD.Clinical Trial Registration Number: UMIN000042333.
Topics: Humans; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Ramucirumab; Docetaxel; Lung Neoplasms; Polyethylene Glycols; Leukopenia; Febrile Neutropenia; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor; Filgrastim
PubMed: 38360906
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-54166-x -
Thoracic Cancer Dec 2023Amrubicin (AMR) regimens have shown efficacy as second-line treatment in patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC); however, adverse events such as febrile neutropenia...
BACKGROUND
Amrubicin (AMR) regimens have shown efficacy as second-line treatment in patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC); however, adverse events such as febrile neutropenia (FN) sometimes preclude their use. Further, the safety and efficacy of AMR with primary prophylactic pegfilgrastim (P-PEG) have not been sufficiently evaluated. In this study, we evaluated the safety and efficacy of AMR with or without P-PEG as second-line chemotherapy for SCLC.
METHODS
We retrospectively reviewed patients with SCLC who received AMR as second-line chemotherapy at Shizuoka Cancer Center, between December 2014 and November 2021. Based on presence/absence of P-PEG in their regimen, patients (n = 60) were divided into P-PEG (n = 21) and non-P-PEG groups, and their clinical outcomes were evaluated.
RESULTS
Median of AMR treatment cycles was five (range: 1-39 cycles) in P-PEG group and four (range: 1-15 cycles) in non-P-PEG group. The incidence of FN (4.8% vs. 30.8%; p = 0.02) and AMR dose reduction because of adverse events (4.8% vs. 25.6%; p = 0.08) were lower in the P-PEG group than in the non-P-PEG group. The objective response rates were 52.4% and 30.8%, and median progression-free and overall survival were 4.7 and 3.0 months, and 9.6 and 6.8 months, in the P-PEG and non-P-PEG groups, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
AMR with P-PEG as second-line chemotherapy for SCLC reduced the incidence of FN at a maintained AMR dose intensity and was associated with favorable tumor responses and survival outcomes. P-PEG should be considered for patients treated with AMR for SCLC including refractory relapsed SCLC.
Topics: Humans; Small Cell Lung Carcinoma; Lung Neoplasms; Retrospective Studies; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols
PubMed: 37873674
DOI: 10.1111/1759-7714.15140 -
Oncology (Williston Park, N.Y.) Jan 2007Most adult patients with hematopoietic failure due to myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) are treated with supportive care measures, including hematopoietic growth factors... (Review)
Review
Most adult patients with hematopoietic failure due to myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) are treated with supportive care measures, including hematopoietic growth factors (epoetin alfa, darbepoetin alfa, filgrastim, pegfilgrastim, sargramostim), red blood cell or platelet transfusions, and antimicrobial agents. Allogeneic stem cell transplantation can be curative, but only a small subset of patients are eligible for transplantation, and until recently there were few options other than supportive care for transplant-ineligible patients. Since 2004, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved three new therapies specifically for the indication of MDS: two DNA methyltransferase inhibitors (azacitidine and decitabine) and an immunomodulatory agent (lenalidomide). Several other drugs are used by clinicians for treatment of patients with MDS, but are not specifically FDA-approved for this indication. With several therapeutic options available, yet none of them effective in the majority of cases, it can be challenging for clinicians to choose the most appropriate treatment for an individual patient. Here we discuss a risk-based management approach to MDS that incorporates recent data regarding these new therapies. While many questions remain about the optimal use of newer agents, the long-standing perception of MDS as a syndrome where therapeutic nihilism is the only realistic approach is slowly beginning to change.
Topics: Anemia, Sideroblastic; Antilymphocyte Serum; Azacitidine; Benzoates; DNA Modification Methylases; Decitabine; Deferasirox; Enzyme Inhibitors; Erythropoietin; Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor; Granulocyte-Macrophage Colony-Stimulating Factor; Histone Deacetylase Inhibitors; Humans; Immunosuppressive Agents; Interleukin-11; Iron Chelating Agents; Lenalidomide; Leukemia, Myelomonocytic, Chronic; Myelodysplastic Syndromes; Prognosis; Risk; Stem Cell Transplantation; Thalidomide; Triazoles
PubMed: 17313156
DOI: No ID Found