Comparison of biosimilar CT-P10 and innovator rituximab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a randomized controlled Phase 3 trialopen access
- Authors
- Park, Won; Bozic-Majstorovic, Ljubinka; Milakovic, Dragana; Berrocal Kasay, Alfredo; Chalouhi El-Khouri, Elias; Irazoque-Palazuelos, Fedra; Cons Molina, Francisco Fidencio; Shesternya, Pavel; Miranda, Pedro; Medina-Rodriguez, Francisco G.; Wiland, Piotr; Jeka, Slawomir; Chavez-Corrales, Jose; Garmish, Olena; Linde, Thomas; Rekalov, Dmytro; Hrycaj, Pawel; Krause, Andreas; Fomina, Natalia; Piura, Olena; Abello-Banfi, Mauricio; Suh, Chang-Hee; Shim, Seung Cheol; Lee, Sang Joon; Lee, Sung Young; Kim, Sung Hwan; Yoo, Dae Hyun
- Issue Date
- Aug-2018
- Publisher
- TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
- Keywords
- Rituximab; CT-P10; rheumatoid arthritis; equivalence; biosimilar
- Citation
- MABS, v.10, no.6, pp.934 - 943
- Indexed
- SCIE
SCOPUS
- Journal Title
- MABS
- Volume
- 10
- Number
- 6
- Start Page
- 934
- End Page
- 943
- URI
- https://scholarworks.bwise.kr/hanyang/handle/2021.sw.hanyang/2315
- DOI
- 10.1080/19420862.2018.1487912
- ISSN
- 1942-0862
- Abstract
- This multinational, randomized, double-blind trial, (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02149121) was designed to demonstrate equivalence in pharmacokinetics and efficacy between CT-P10 and innovator rituximab (RTX) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Adults with active RA were treated with CT-P10, United States-sourced RTX (US-RTX; Rituxan®), or European Union-sourced RTX (EU-RTX; MabThera®) at weeks 0 and 2. The co-primary pharmacokinetic endpoints were area under the serum concentration–time curve (AUC) from time zero to last measurable concentration (AUC0–last), AUC from time zero to infinity (AUC0–∞), and maximum concentration (Cmax) after two infusions. The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline to week 24 in Disease Activity Score using 28 joints-C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP). Pharmacodynamics, immunogenicity, and safety were also assessed. 372 patients were randomly assigned to CT-P10 (n = 161) or RTX (n = 211 [US-RTX, n = 151; EU-RTX, n = 60]). For the co-primary pharmacokinetic endpoints, 90% confidence intervals (CI) for ratios of geometric means (CT-P10/US-RTX, CT-P10/EU-RTX or EU-RTX/US-RTX) all fell within the equivalence margin of 80–125%. Adjusted least squares (LS) mean (standard error) change from baseline in DAS28-CRP at week 24 was −2.13 (0.175) for CT-P10 and −2.09 (0.176) for RTX. The 95% CI (−0.29, 0.21) of the estimated treatment difference between CT-P10 and RTX (−0.04) was entirely within the efficacy equivalence margin of ±0.5. Pharmacodynamics, immunogenicity, and safety profiles were similar for CT-P10 and RTX. The pharmacokinetics of CT-P10, US-RTX, and EU-RTX were equivalent. CT-P10 and RTX were also equivalent in terms of efficacy and displayed similar pharmacodynamic, immunogenicity, and safety profiles up to week 24.
- Files in This Item
-
Go to Link
- Appears in
Collections - 서울 의과대학 > 서울 내과학교실 > 1. Journal Articles

Items in ScholarWorks are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.