Efficacy and Safety of Biosimilar Cetuximab Versus Innovator Cetuximab in Indian Patients With Head and Neck Cancer: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase III Trial.

IF 3.2 Q2 ONCOLOGY
JCO Global Oncology Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-11-14 DOI:10.1200/GO.24.00059
Kumar Prabhash, Chetan Deshmukh, Hemant Malhotra, Atul Sharma, Minish Jain, Nilesh Dhamne, Rajnish Nagarakar, Prasantha Ganesan, Vijay K Mahobia, Chandan K Das, Rejnish Kumar, Prakash S Shivanna, Manu P Avaronnan, Puligundla K Chaithanya, Vaibhav Chaudhary, Kartar Singh, Suhas Aagre, Bellala Ravishankar, Dhruv Mehta, Kandipalli Shilpa, Vashishth Maniar, Koushik Chatterjee, Saroj D Majumdar, Rohitashwa Dana, Vanita Noronha, Nandini Menon, Akhilesh Sharma, Roshan Pawar, Vinayaka Shahavi, Rajiv Yadav, Amol Aiwale
{"title":"Efficacy and Safety of Biosimilar Cetuximab Versus Innovator Cetuximab in Indian Patients With Head and Neck Cancer: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase III Trial.","authors":"Kumar Prabhash, Chetan Deshmukh, Hemant Malhotra, Atul Sharma, Minish Jain, Nilesh Dhamne, Rajnish Nagarakar, Prasantha Ganesan, Vijay K Mahobia, Chandan K Das, Rejnish Kumar, Prakash S Shivanna, Manu P Avaronnan, Puligundla K Chaithanya, Vaibhav Chaudhary, Kartar Singh, Suhas Aagre, Bellala Ravishankar, Dhruv Mehta, Kandipalli Shilpa, Vashishth Maniar, Koushik Chatterjee, Saroj D Majumdar, Rohitashwa Dana, Vanita Noronha, Nandini Menon, Akhilesh Sharma, Roshan Pawar, Vinayaka Shahavi, Rajiv Yadav, Amol Aiwale","doi":"10.1200/GO.24.00059","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) is the sixth most common cancer, with approximately 225,419 new cases with over 125,000 deaths annually in India. This trial compared the efficacy and safety of biosimilar cetuximab versus innovator cetuximab (IC) in combination with platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with recurrent locoregional or metastatic SCCHN.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This phase III trial is a multicenter, randomized, double-blind and parallel group study performed in Indian patients with recurrent locoregional or metastatic SCCHN. Patients were randomly assigned in 2:1 ratio to receive biosimilar cetuximab and IC in combination with cisplatin and fluorouracil via intravenous infusions. The primary end points were disease control rate (DCR) and overall response rate (ORR) as per response evaluation criteria in solid tumors version 1.1. The secondary end points included pharmacokinetics (PK), immunogenicity, safety, and tolerability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 180 patients enrolled, 120 patients received biosimilar cetuximab and 60 patients received IC treatment. No significant statistical difference was observed in the primary outcomes between two groups. Treatment difference in DCR and ORR response was found to be -5.21 (90% CI, -8.94 to -1.48) and -4.79 (90% CI, -19.42 to 9.84), respectively, indicating noninferiority to reference product. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs; biosimilar cetuximab: 89.2% <i>v</i> IC: 91.7%; <i>P</i> = .8364) and serious AEs (biosimilar cetuximab: 23.3% <i>v</i> IC: 13.3%; <i>P</i> = .0603) and PK parameters were comparable between treatment groups. The immunogenicity findings showed higher incidence of anticetuximab antibodies in the biosimilar cetuximab group compared with the IC group at the end of Study.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The findings of this study demonstrated noninferiority along with comparable PK, safety, and immunogenicity of biosimilar cetuximab and IC in patients with recurrent or metastatic SCCHN.</p>","PeriodicalId":14806,"journal":{"name":"JCO Global Oncology","volume":"10 ","pages":"e2400059"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JCO Global Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1200/GO.24.00059","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) is the sixth most common cancer, with approximately 225,419 new cases with over 125,000 deaths annually in India. This trial compared the efficacy and safety of biosimilar cetuximab versus innovator cetuximab (IC) in combination with platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with recurrent locoregional or metastatic SCCHN.

Methods: This phase III trial is a multicenter, randomized, double-blind and parallel group study performed in Indian patients with recurrent locoregional or metastatic SCCHN. Patients were randomly assigned in 2:1 ratio to receive biosimilar cetuximab and IC in combination with cisplatin and fluorouracil via intravenous infusions. The primary end points were disease control rate (DCR) and overall response rate (ORR) as per response evaluation criteria in solid tumors version 1.1. The secondary end points included pharmacokinetics (PK), immunogenicity, safety, and tolerability.

Results: Of 180 patients enrolled, 120 patients received biosimilar cetuximab and 60 patients received IC treatment. No significant statistical difference was observed in the primary outcomes between two groups. Treatment difference in DCR and ORR response was found to be -5.21 (90% CI, -8.94 to -1.48) and -4.79 (90% CI, -19.42 to 9.84), respectively, indicating noninferiority to reference product. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs; biosimilar cetuximab: 89.2% v IC: 91.7%; P = .8364) and serious AEs (biosimilar cetuximab: 23.3% v IC: 13.3%; P = .0603) and PK parameters were comparable between treatment groups. The immunogenicity findings showed higher incidence of anticetuximab antibodies in the biosimilar cetuximab group compared with the IC group at the end of Study.

Conclusion: The findings of this study demonstrated noninferiority along with comparable PK, safety, and immunogenicity of biosimilar cetuximab and IC in patients with recurrent or metastatic SCCHN.

印度头颈癌患者使用西妥昔单抗生物仿制药与西妥昔单抗创新药的疗效和安全性:多中心、随机、双盲、III 期试验。
目的:头颈部鳞状细胞癌(SCCHN)是印度第六大常见癌症,每年新增病例约 225,419 例,死亡人数超过 125,000 人。这项试验比较了生物仿制药西妥昔单抗与创新药西妥昔单抗(IC)联合铂类化疗治疗复发性局部或转移性SCCHN患者的疗效和安全性:这项III期试验是一项多中心、随机、双盲和平行分组研究,在印度复发性局部或转移性SCCHN患者中进行。患者按 2:1 的比例随机分配,接受生物仿制药西妥昔单抗和 IC 联合顺铂和氟尿嘧啶静脉输注治疗。根据实体瘤反应评价标准1.1版,主要终点为疾病控制率(DCR)和总反应率(ORR)。次要终点包括药代动力学(PK)、免疫原性、安全性和耐受性:在 180 名入组患者中,120 名患者接受了生物类似物西妥昔单抗治疗,60 名患者接受了 IC 治疗。两组患者的主要结果无明显统计学差异。DCR和ORR反应的治疗差异分别为-5.21(90% CI,-8.94至-1.48)和-4.79(90% CI,-19.42至9.84),表明与参比产品相比无劣效性。治疗组之间的治疗突发不良事件(AEs;生物类似药西妥昔单抗:89.2%对IC:91.7%;P = .8364)和严重AEs(生物类似药西妥昔单抗:23.3%对IC:13.3%;P = .0603)发生率以及PK参数相当。免疫原性研究结果显示,在研究结束时,生物类似物西妥昔单抗组的抗西妥昔单抗抗体发生率高于IC组:本研究结果表明,生物类似药西妥昔单抗和IC在复发性或转移性SCCHN患者中的疗效非劣效性,且PK、安全性和免疫原性相当。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
JCO Global Oncology
JCO Global Oncology Medicine-Oncology
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
6.70%
发文量
310
审稿时长
7 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信