Dataset Information

Efficacy and Safety of a Proposed Ranibizumab Biosimilar Product vs a Reference Ranibizumab Product for Patients With Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Neovascular age-related macular degeneration is the leading cause of blindness in individuals 50 years or older. The availability of a ranibizumab biosimilar product (SB11) may facilitate access to an effective alternative to this treatment.

Objective

To demonstrate equivalence of efficacy, similar safety, and similar immunogenicity of SB11 compared with the reference ranibizumab.

Design, setting, and participants

This randomized, double-masked, parallel-group phase 3 equivalence study was conducted in 75 centers in 9 countries from March 14, 2018, to December 9, 2019, among 705 participants 50 years or older with neovascular age-related macular degeneration with active subfoveal choroidal neovascularization lesions. Analysis was performed on an intent-to-treat basis.

Interventions

Intravitreous injection of SB11 or ranibizumab, 0.5 mg, every 4 weeks through week 48.

Main outcomes and measures

Preplanned interim analysis after all participants completed the week 24 assessment of primary efficacy end points at week 8 for change from baseline in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and week 4 for central subfield thickness (CST), with predefined equivalence margins for adjusted treatment differences of -3 letters to 3 letters for BCVA and -36 μm to 36 μm for CST.

Results

Baseline and disease characteristics among 705 randomized participants (403 women [57.2%]; mean [SD] age, 74.1 [8.5] years) were comparable between treatment groups (SB11, 351; ranibizumab, 354). Least-squares mean (SE) changes in BCVA from baseline at week 8 were 6.2 (0.5) letters in the SB11 group vs 7.0 (0.5) letters in the ranibizumab group, with an adjusted treatment difference of -0.8 letter (90% CI, -1.8 to 0.2 letters). Least-squares mean (SE) changes in CST from baseline at week 4 were -108 (5) μm in the SB11 group vs -100 (5) μm in the ranibizumab group, with an adjusted treatment difference of -8 μm (95% CI, -19 to 3 μm). Incidences of treatment-emergent adverse events (231 of 350 [66.0%] vs 237 of 354 [66.9%]), including serious treatment-emergent adverse events (44 of 350 [12.6%] vs 44 of 354 [12.4%]) and treatment-emergent adverse events leading to study drug discontinuation (8 of 350 [2.3%] vs 5 of 354 [1.4%]), were similar in the SB11 and ranibizumab groups. Immunogenicity was low, with a cumulative incidence of antidrug antibodies up to week 24 of 3.0% (10 of 330) in the SB11 group and 3.1% (10 of 327) in the ranibizumab group.

Conclusions and relevance

These findings of equivalent efficacy and similar safety and immunogenicity profiles compared with ranibizumab support the use of SB11 for patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03150589.

SUBMITTER: Woo SJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7677876 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionThis trial aimed to compare the efficacy and safety between biosimilar QL1207 and the reference aflibercept for the treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD).MethodsThis randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial was conducted at 35 centers in China. Patients aged ≥ 50 years old with untreated subfoveal choroidal neovascularization secondary to nAMD and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) letter score of 73-34 were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned to receive intravitreous injections of QL1207 or aflibercept 2 mg (0.05 ml) in the study eye every 4 weeks for the first 3 months, followed by 2 mg every 8 weeks until week 48, stratified by baseline BCVA ≥ or < 45 letters. The primary endpoint was BCVA change from baseline at week 12. The equivalence margin was ± 5 letters. The safety, immunogenicity, pharmacokinetics (PK), and plasma vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) concentration were also evaluated.ResultsA total of 366 patients were enrolled (QL1207 group, n = 185; aflibercept group, n = 181) from Aug 2019 to Jan 2022 with comparable baseline characteristics. The least-squares mean difference in BCVA changes was - 1.1 letters (95% confidence interval - 3.0 to 0.7; P = 0.2275) between the two groups, within the equivalence margin. The incidences of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE; QL1207: 71.4% [132/185] vs. aflibercept: 71.8% [130/181]) and serious TEAE (QL1207: 14.1% [26] vs. aflibercept: 12.7% [23]) appeared comparable between treatment groups, and no new safety signal was found. Anti-drug antibody, PK profiles, and VEGF concentration were similar between the two groups.ConclusionsQL1207 has equivalent efficacy to aflibercept for nAMD with similar safety profiles. It could be used as an alternative anti-VEGF agent for clinical practice.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05345236 (retrospectively registered on April 25, 2022); National Medical Products Administration of China: CTR20190937 (May 20, 2019).

Project description:BackgroundClinical trials have established the efficacy of ranibizumab for the treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD). In addition, bevacizumab is used off-label to treat AMD, despite the absence of similar supporting data.MethodsIn a multicenter, single-blind, noninferiority trial, we randomly assigned 1208 patients with neovascular AMD to receive intravitreal injections of ranibizumab or bevacizumab on either a monthly schedule or as needed with monthly evaluation. The primary outcome was the mean change in visual acuity at 1 year, with a noninferiority limit of 5 letters on the eye chart.ResultsBevacizumab administered monthly was equivalent to ranibizumab administered monthly, with 8.0 and 8.5 letters gained, respectively. Bevacizumab administered as needed was equivalent to ranibizumab as needed, with 5.9 and 6.8 letters gained, respectively. Ranibizumab as needed was equivalent to monthly ranibizumab, although the comparison between bevacizumab as needed and monthly bevacizumab was inconclusive. The mean decrease in central retinal thickness was greater in the ranibizumab-monthly group (196 μm) than in the other groups (152 to 168 μm, P=0.03 by analysis of variance). Rates of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke were similar for patients receiving either bevacizumab or ranibizumab (P>0.20). The proportion of patients with serious systemic adverse events (primarily hospitalizations) was higher with bevacizumab than with ranibizumab (24.1% vs. 19.0%; risk ratio, 1.29; 95% confidence interval, 1.01 to 1.66), with excess events broadly distributed in disease categories not identified in previous studies as areas of concern.ConclusionsAt 1 year, bevacizumab and ranibizumab had equivalent effects on visual acuity when administered according to the same schedule. Ranibizumab given as needed with monthly evaluation had effects on vision that were equivalent to those of ranibizumab administered monthly. Differences in rates of serious adverse events require further study. (Funded by the National Eye Institute; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00593450.).

Project description:BackgroundAnti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents have become the standard of care in neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). Despite generally excellent response rates to anti-VEGF therapy, some patients do not respond or may respond suboptimally. In the case of refractory or rapidly recurring fluid in nAMD, clinicians may switch to another anti-VEGF agent. TITAN was an observational study that assessed the effectiveness and safety of intravitreal aflibercept (IVT-AFL) in patients with nAMD refractory to ranibizumab who switched to IVT-AFL after less than 12?months of ranibizumab treatment in routine clinical practice in France.MethodsTITAN was an observational, retrospective and prospective 12-month study conducted at 28 centres in France. Patients with nAMD refractory to ranibizumab were enrolled. Patients who were switched from ranibizumab to IVT-AFL were followed for 12?months. Data were obtained from medical records for retrospectively included patients, and at routine follow-up visits for those included prospectively. The main outcome measure was percentage of patients who achieved treatment success (gain of ?1 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study letters in best-corrected visual acuity [BCVA] and/or any reduction in central retinal thickness [CRT]) from baseline to 12?months after switching. A sample size of 225 patients was determined based on a 2-sided 95% confidence interval with a width equal to 0.12 when the sample proportion was 0.70.ResultsWe analysed safety data (N =?217) and clinical outcomes from patients in the per-protocol population (n =?125). The mean (standard deviation) number of IVT-AFL injections was 7.5 (2.6). Treatment success was achieved in 68.8% of patients. Mean BCVA change from baseline to Month 12 was +?1.5 letters (P =?0.105) and the mean CRT change was -?45.0??m (P <? 0.001). In a subgroup analysis, in patients who received three initial monthly IVT-AFL injections, mean BCVA gain was 3.3 letters at Month 12 (P =?0.015). Excluding lack of efficacy and inappropriate scheduling of drug administration, the most common adverse event was eye pain (2.3%).ConclusionsSwitching ranibizumab-refractory patients with nAMD to IVT-AFL may improve visual outcomes in some patients, particularly those who receive three initial monthly injections.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov , NCT02321241 . First posted: December 22, 2014; Last update posted: July 2, 2018.

Project description:PurposeWe sought to determine the most cost-effective treatment for patients with newly diagnosed neovascular macular degeneration: monthly or as-needed bevacizumab injections, or monthly or as-needed ranibizumab injections.DesignCost-effectiveness analysis.ParticipantsHypothetical cohort of 80-year-old patients with newly diagnosed neovascular macular degeneration.MethodsUsing a mathematical model with a 20-year time horizon, we compared the incremental cost-effectiveness of treating a hypothetical cohort of 80-year-old patients with newly diagnosed neovascular macular degeneration using monthly bevacizumab, as-needed bevacizumab, monthly ranibizumab, or as-needed ranibizumab. Data came from the Comparison of Age-related macular degeneration Treatment Trial (CATT), the Medicare Fee Schedule, and the medical literature.Main outcome measuresCosts, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental costs per QALY gained.ResultsCompared with as-needed bevacizumab, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of monthly bevacizumab is $24,2 357/QALY. Monthly ranibizumab gains an additional 0.02 QALYs versus monthly bevacizumab at an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of >$10 million/QALY. As-needed ranibizumab was dominated by monthly bevacizumab, meaning it was more costly and less effective. In sensitivity analyses assuming a willingness to pay of $100,000/QALY, the annual risk of serious vascular events would have to be ≥2.5 times higher with bevacizumab than that observed in the CATT trial for as-needed ranibizumab to have an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of <$100,000/QALY. In another sensitivity analysis, even if every patient receiving bevacizumab experienced declining vision by 1 category (e.g., from 20/25-20/40 to 20/50-20/80) after 2 years but every patient receiving ranibizumab retained their vision level, as-needed ranibizumab would have an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $97,340/QALY.ConclusionsEven after considering the potential for differences in risks of serious adverse events and therapeutic effectiveness, bevacizumab confers considerably greater value than ranibizumab for the treatment of neovascular macular degeneration.

Project description:ImportanceFaricimab, the first bispecific antibody designed for intraocular use, simultaneously and independently binds and neutralizes angiopoietin 2 (Ang-2) and vascular endothelial growth factor A (VEGF-A).ObjectiveTo assess the efficacy and safety of different doses and regimens of faricimab vs ranibizumab in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD).Design, setting, and participantsAVENUE was a 36-week, multiple-dose-regimen, active comparator-controlled, double-masked, phase 2 randomized clinical study performed at 58 sites in the United States. Eligible participants were anti-VEGF treatment naive with choroidal neovascularization secondary to nAMD and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letter score of 73 (Snellen equivalent, 20/40) to 24 (Snellen equivalent, 20/320). Data were collected from August 11, 2015, to January 12, 2017, with the final patient visit completed September 26, 2017. Data were analyzed from August 11, 2015, to October 4, 2019.InterventionsPatients were randomized 3:2:2:2:3 to receive ranibizumab, 0.5 mg every 4 weeks (arm A [n = 68]); faricimab, 1.5 mg every 4 weeks (arm B [n = 47]); faricimab, 6.0 mg every 4 weeks (arm C [n = 42]); faricimab, 6.0 mg every 4 weeks until week 12, then faricimab, 6.0 mg every 8 weeks (arm D [n = 47]); and ranibizumab, 0.5 mg every 4 weeks until week 8, then faricimab, 6.0 mg every 4 weeks (arm E [n = 69]).Main outcomes and measuresMean change in BCVA from baseline to week 36, proportion of participants gaining at least 15 letters, BCVA of 20/40 or better or 20/200 or worse, and ocular coherence tomographic outcomes in anti-VEGF treatment-naive participants (arms A, B, C, D) and from weeks 12 to 36 in those with incomplete response (participants in arms A and E with week 12 BCVA ETDRS letter score of ≤68 [Snellen equivalent, 20/50 or worse]).ResultsA total of 263 participants were included in the analysis (172 [65.4%] female; 258 [98.1%] white; mean [SD] age, 78.3 [8.7] years). At week 36, adjusted mean change in BCVA vs ranibizumab was 1.6 (80% CI, -1.6 to 4.7) letters for arm B (P = .52), -1.6 (80% CI, -4.9 to 1.7) letters for arm C (P = .53), and -1.5 (80% CI, -4.6 to 1.6) letters for arm D (P = .53). For arm E, adjusted mean change from week 12 was -1.7 (80% CI, -3.8 to 0.4) letters (P = .30).Conclusions and relevanceAVENUE did not meet its primary end point of superiority of faricimab over ranibizumab in BCVA at week 36. Although not superior to monthly ranibizumab as given in this trial, overall visual and anatomical gains noted with faricimab support pursuing phase 3 trials for a potential alternative to monthly anti-VEGF therapy. Faricimab showed no new or unexpected safety signals.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02484690.

Project description:PurposeNeovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) shows variable treatment response to intravitreal anti-VEGF. This analysis compared the potential of different artificial intelligence (AI)-based machine learning models using OCT and clinical variables to accurately predict at baseline the best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at 9 months in response to ranibizumab in patients with nAMD.DesignRetrospective analysis.ParticipantsBaseline and imaging data from patients with subfoveal choroidal neovascularization secondary to age-related macular dengeration.MethodsBaseline data from 502 study eyes from the HARBOR (NCT00891735) prospective clinical trial (monthly ranibizumab 0.5 and 2.0 mg arms) were pooled; 432 baseline OCT volume scans were included in the analysis. Seven models, based on baseline quantitative OCT features (Least absolute shrinkage and selection operator [Lasso] OCT minimum [min], Lasso OCT 1 standard error [SE]); on quantitative OCT features and clinical variables at baseline (Lasso min, Lasso 1SE, CatBoost, RF [random forest]); or on baseline OCT images only (deep learning [DL] model), were systematically compared with a benchmark linear model of baseline age and BCVA. Quantitative OCT features were derived by a DL segmentation model on the volume images, including retinal layer volumes and thicknesses, and retinal fluid biomarkers, including statistics on fluid volume and distribution.Main outcome measuresPrognostic ability of the models was evaluated using coefficient of determination (R2) and median absolute error (MAE; letters).ResultsIn the first cross-validation split, mean R2 (MAE) of the Lasso min, Lasso 1SE, CatBoost, and RF models was 0.46 (7.87), 0.42 (8.43), 0.45 (7.75), and 0.43 (7.60), respectively. These models ranked higher than or similar to the benchmark model (mean R2, 0.41; mean MAE, 8.20 letters) and better than OCT-only models (mean R2: Lasso OCT min, 0.20; Lasso OCT 1SE, 0.16; DL, 0.34). The Lasso min model was selected for detailed analysis; mean R2 (MAE) of the Lasso min and benchmark models for 1000 repeated cross-validation splits were 0.46 (7.7) and 0.42 (8.0), respectively.ConclusionsMachine learning models based on AI-segmented OCT features and clinical variables at baseline may predict future response to ranibizumab treatment in patients with nAMD. However, further developments will be needed to realize the clinical utility of such AI-based tools.Financial disclosuresProprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.