Rituximab Biosimilar Prevents Poor Outcomes of Microscopic Polyangiitis and Granulomatosis with Polyangiitis as Effectively as Rituximab Originator
Objective: There are no extensive study to compare the effectiveness between the originator rituximab (Mabthera®) and its biosimilar (Truxima®) for microscopic polyangiitis (MPA) and granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA). Here, we examined the clinical effects of rituximab on the poor results of the MPA and the GPA in Korean patients, and compared them between Mabthera® and Truxima®.
Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 139 patients, including 97 patients and 42 patients GPA MPA. At diagnosis, positive antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody and comorbidity were assessed. During follow-up, all-cause mortality, recurrence, end-stage renal disease, cerebrovascular accident and acute coronary syndrome was evaluated as poor results. In this study, rituximab is used as one Mabthera® or Truxima®.
Results: The median age of diagnosis was 60.1 years and 46 patients were male (97 MPA and 42 patients GPA). Among the poor results, patients who received rituximab exhibited survival rates are significantly lower cumulative relapse-free compared with those who did not receive rituximab (p = 0.002). However, the use of rituximab did not make a difference in other adverse outcomes of MPA and GPA except for relapse, which may be the denial to the fact that the use of rituximab after relapse eventually lead to a better prognosis. There are no significant differences in the variables at diagnosis and during follow-up among patients who received Mabthera® and they receive Truxima®. Patients receiving Truxima® exhibited the same pattern of cumulative survival rate of each outcome bad for them to Mabthera®.
Conclusion: Truxima® prevent adverse outcomes of MPA and GPA as effectively as Mabthera®.
A quarterly dataset covering October 2012 to March 2018 was built from a database MIDAS-IQVIA International. The sales value (in USD) and volume (in standard units) of infliximab originator and biosimilar products and their relative prices in each country are compared.
Anti-TNF Biosimilars in Rheumatology: The End of an Era?
inhibitors of tumor necrosis factor (TNFi), has revolutionized the treatment of rheumatic diseases. While very nutritious, the original TNFi also brings high acquisition costs which limited its use. “Biosimilar” TNFi, developed at the expiration of the patent for biooriginators, have comparable efficacy and safety, which are cheaper and provide the potential to increase access to effective therapies in a more cost-effective.
Areas covered: background and development TNFis, their biosimilars and follow drugs “copycat” is discussed, together with their use in both developed and developing countries, with a focus on the potential for increasing access to effective targeted therapies. expert opinion: Bridging the economic divide to facilitate universal access to anti-TNF biosimilars have been largely unsuccessful, encourage the development of impersonators imitate in developing countries. Meanwhile, the introduction of newer targeted synthetic disease-modifying drugs have provided a cheaper, equally effective treatments for rheumatic diseases are easily delivered through the mouth.Connection error.
We review biosimilars TNF in rheumatic diseases, their role in the treatment of rapidly evolving landscape and speculate about the future for this iconic therapeutic classes. Product monograph for reference bevacizumab (Avastin) and biosimilar bevacizumab (Mvasi) recommend to infuse the first dose of bevacizumab more than 90 minutes, the second dose over 60 minutes and the third and subsequent doses over 30 minutes. Despite the recommendations monograph products, many organizations adopt an accelerated bevacizumab (Avastin) 0.5 mg / kg / min infusion time.