阿达木单抗生物类似药和原药治疗银屑病的有效性。

IF 11.5 1区 医学 Q1 DERMATOLOGY
Duc Binh Phan, Anthony P Bewley, Philip Laws, Teena Mackenzie, Catherine H Smith, Christopher E M Griffiths, Mark Lunt, Richard B Warren, Zenas Z N Yiu
{"title":"阿达木单抗生物类似药和原药治疗银屑病的有效性。","authors":"Duc Binh Phan, Anthony P Bewley, Philip Laws, Teena Mackenzie, Catherine H Smith, Christopher E M Griffiths, Mark Lunt, Richard B Warren, Zenas Z N Yiu","doi":"10.1001/jamadermatol.2025.0055","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>The uncertainties about the real-world effectiveness of adalimumab biosimilars limit their widespread adoption for psoriasis.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the effectiveness of adalimumab biosimilars Amjevita and Imraldi with Humira for psoriasis.</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>An emulation of 2 targeted pragmatic clinical trials was conducted using data from the British Association of Dermatologists Biologics and Immunomodulators Register (BADBIR), a prospective pharmacovigilance registry tracking individuals receiving biologic and conventional systemic treatments for psoriasis in the UK and the Republic of Ireland. Data from patients with psoriasis using adalimumab registered to BADBIR were included. Data were collected from September 2007 to January 2023, and data were analyzed from January to September 2023.</p><p><strong>Exposures: </strong>The effectiveness of initiating Amjevita and Imraldi were compared with initiating Humira among adalimumab-naive patients, and the effectiveness of switching from Humira to either Amjevita or Imraldi were compared with continuing Humira among patients who had been using Humira consistently for more than 2 years.</p><p><strong>Main outcomes and measures: </strong>The study outcomes were absolute Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score of 2 or less and PASI score of 4 or less at 12 months after the index date. Inverse propensity treatment weighting was used to analyze receiving either biosimilars or Humira to account for confounding. Multiple imputations were used to account for missing PASI data at 12 months and inverse probability of censoring weighting to account for censorship due to deviation from the treatments under investigation. Logistic regression models were fitted to compare the outcomes between study cohorts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 11 400 included patients, 6924 (60.7%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 45.3 (12.5) years. A total of 6133 patients were identified in the new user analysis (5416 starting Humira, 382 starting Amjevita, and 335 starting Imraldi) and 5267 patients in the switcher analysis (3808 continuing Humira, 847 switching to Amjevita, and 612 switching to Imraldi). Amjevita and Imraldi new users had no significantly different probability of achieving a PASI score of 2 or less (Amjevita: adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.98; 95% CI, 0.78-1.25; Imraldi: aOR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.64-1.07) and a PASI score of 4 or less (Amjevita: aOR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.84-1.37; Imraldi: aOR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.69-1.20) compared with Humira new users. Patients who switched to Amjevita and Imraldi also had no statistically significant differences in achieving a PASI score of 2 or less (Amjevita: aOR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.94-1.51; Imraldi: aOR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.72-1.18) and a PASI score of 4 or less (Amjevita: aOR, 1.32; 95% CI, 0.96-1.84; Imraldi: aOR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.70-1.41) compared with those who continued Humira.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>In this study, Amjevita and Imraldi were as effective as Humira for both new starters and patients switching to biosimilars from Humira.</p>","PeriodicalId":14734,"journal":{"name":"JAMA dermatology","volume":" ","pages":"358-366"},"PeriodicalIF":11.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11883583/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effectiveness of Adalimumab Biosimilars and Originator for Psoriasis.\",\"authors\":\"Duc Binh Phan, Anthony P Bewley, Philip Laws, Teena Mackenzie, Catherine H Smith, Christopher E M Griffiths, Mark Lunt, Richard B Warren, Zenas Z N Yiu\",\"doi\":\"10.1001/jamadermatol.2025.0055\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>The uncertainties about the real-world effectiveness of adalimumab biosimilars limit their widespread adoption for psoriasis.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the effectiveness of adalimumab biosimilars Amjevita and Imraldi with Humira for psoriasis.</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>An emulation of 2 targeted pragmatic clinical trials was conducted using data from the British Association of Dermatologists Biologics and Immunomodulators Register (BADBIR), a prospective pharmacovigilance registry tracking individuals receiving biologic and conventional systemic treatments for psoriasis in the UK and the Republic of Ireland. Data from patients with psoriasis using adalimumab registered to BADBIR were included. Data were collected from September 2007 to January 2023, and data were analyzed from January to September 2023.</p><p><strong>Exposures: </strong>The effectiveness of initiating Amjevita and Imraldi were compared with initiating Humira among adalimumab-naive patients, and the effectiveness of switching from Humira to either Amjevita or Imraldi were compared with continuing Humira among patients who had been using Humira consistently for more than 2 years.</p><p><strong>Main outcomes and measures: </strong>The study outcomes were absolute Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score of 2 or less and PASI score of 4 or less at 12 months after the index date. Inverse propensity treatment weighting was used to analyze receiving either biosimilars or Humira to account for confounding. Multiple imputations were used to account for missing PASI data at 12 months and inverse probability of censoring weighting to account for censorship due to deviation from the treatments under investigation. Logistic regression models were fitted to compare the outcomes between study cohorts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 11 400 included patients, 6924 (60.7%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 45.3 (12.5) years. A total of 6133 patients were identified in the new user analysis (5416 starting Humira, 382 starting Amjevita, and 335 starting Imraldi) and 5267 patients in the switcher analysis (3808 continuing Humira, 847 switching to Amjevita, and 612 switching to Imraldi). Amjevita and Imraldi new users had no significantly different probability of achieving a PASI score of 2 or less (Amjevita: adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.98; 95% CI, 0.78-1.25; Imraldi: aOR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.64-1.07) and a PASI score of 4 or less (Amjevita: aOR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.84-1.37; Imraldi: aOR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.69-1.20) compared with Humira new users. Patients who switched to Amjevita and Imraldi also had no statistically significant differences in achieving a PASI score of 2 or less (Amjevita: aOR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.94-1.51; Imraldi: aOR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.72-1.18) and a PASI score of 4 or less (Amjevita: aOR, 1.32; 95% CI, 0.96-1.84; Imraldi: aOR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.70-1.41) compared with those who continued Humira.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>In this study, Amjevita and Imraldi were as effective as Humira for both new starters and patients switching to biosimilars from Humira.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14734,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JAMA dermatology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"358-366\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":11.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11883583/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JAMA dermatology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamadermatol.2025.0055\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DERMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JAMA dermatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamadermatol.2025.0055","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DERMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

重要性:阿达木单抗生物类似药在现实世界有效性的不确定性限制了其在牛皮癣中的广泛应用。目的:比较阿达木单抗生物类似药Amjevita和Imraldi与Humira治疗银屑病的疗效。设计、设置和参与者:采用英国皮肤科医师协会生物制剂和免疫调节剂登记册(BADBIR)的数据进行了2项针对性实用临床试验的模拟,BADBIR是一个前瞻性药物警戒登记册,跟踪英国和爱尔兰共和国接受牛皮癣生物和常规全身治疗的个体。使用阿达木单抗注册到BADBIR的银屑病患者的数据被纳入。数据采集时间为2007年9月至2023年1月,数据分析时间为2023年1月至9月。暴露:在阿达木单抗初治患者中,将Amjevita和Imraldi初始化与Humira初始化的有效性进行比较,并在持续使用Humira超过2年的患者中,将Humira转换为Amjevita或Imraldi与继续使用Humira的有效性进行比较。主要结局和指标:研究结果为指数日期后12个月的绝对银屑病面积和严重程度指数(PASI)评分为2或以下,PASI评分为4或以下。反向倾向处理加权用于分析接受生物仿制药或修美乐以解释混淆。多重归算用于解释12个月PASI数据的缺失,以及审查权重的逆概率,以解释因偏离调查处理而导致的审查。采用Logistic回归模型比较研究队列之间的结果。结果:1 400例纳入的患者中,男性6924例(60.7%),平均(SD)年龄为45.3(12.5)岁。在新用户分析中共确定了6133例患者(5416例开始使用Humira, 382例开始使用Amjevita, 335例开始使用Imraldi),在切换分析中确定了5267例患者(3808例继续使用Humira, 847例切换到Amjevita, 612例切换到Imraldi)。Amjevita和Imraldi新使用者获得PASI得分2分或更低的概率无显著差异(Amjevita:调整优势比[aOR], 0.98;95% ci, 0.78-1.25;Imraldi: aOR, 0.83;95% CI, 0.64-1.07), PASI评分为4或更低(Amjevita: aOR, 1.07;95% ci, 0.84-1.37;Imraldi: aOR, 0.91;95% CI, 0.69-1.20)。切换到Amjevita和Imraldi的患者在获得2分或更低的PASI评分方面也没有统计学上的显著差异(Amjevita: aOR, 1.19;95% ci, 0.94-1.51;Imraldi: aOR, 0.92;95% CI, 0.72-1.18), PASI评分为4或更低(Amjevita: aOR, 1.32;95% ci, 0.96-1.84;[au:] 1.00;95% CI, 0.70-1.41)。结论和相关性:在本研究中,Amjevita和Imraldi对于新患者和从Humira转向生物类似药的患者都与Humira一样有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effectiveness of Adalimumab Biosimilars and Originator for Psoriasis.

Importance: The uncertainties about the real-world effectiveness of adalimumab biosimilars limit their widespread adoption for psoriasis.

Objective: To compare the effectiveness of adalimumab biosimilars Amjevita and Imraldi with Humira for psoriasis.

Design, setting, and participants: An emulation of 2 targeted pragmatic clinical trials was conducted using data from the British Association of Dermatologists Biologics and Immunomodulators Register (BADBIR), a prospective pharmacovigilance registry tracking individuals receiving biologic and conventional systemic treatments for psoriasis in the UK and the Republic of Ireland. Data from patients with psoriasis using adalimumab registered to BADBIR were included. Data were collected from September 2007 to January 2023, and data were analyzed from January to September 2023.

Exposures: The effectiveness of initiating Amjevita and Imraldi were compared with initiating Humira among adalimumab-naive patients, and the effectiveness of switching from Humira to either Amjevita or Imraldi were compared with continuing Humira among patients who had been using Humira consistently for more than 2 years.

Main outcomes and measures: The study outcomes were absolute Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score of 2 or less and PASI score of 4 or less at 12 months after the index date. Inverse propensity treatment weighting was used to analyze receiving either biosimilars or Humira to account for confounding. Multiple imputations were used to account for missing PASI data at 12 months and inverse probability of censoring weighting to account for censorship due to deviation from the treatments under investigation. Logistic regression models were fitted to compare the outcomes between study cohorts.

Results: Of 11 400 included patients, 6924 (60.7%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 45.3 (12.5) years. A total of 6133 patients were identified in the new user analysis (5416 starting Humira, 382 starting Amjevita, and 335 starting Imraldi) and 5267 patients in the switcher analysis (3808 continuing Humira, 847 switching to Amjevita, and 612 switching to Imraldi). Amjevita and Imraldi new users had no significantly different probability of achieving a PASI score of 2 or less (Amjevita: adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.98; 95% CI, 0.78-1.25; Imraldi: aOR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.64-1.07) and a PASI score of 4 or less (Amjevita: aOR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.84-1.37; Imraldi: aOR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.69-1.20) compared with Humira new users. Patients who switched to Amjevita and Imraldi also had no statistically significant differences in achieving a PASI score of 2 or less (Amjevita: aOR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.94-1.51; Imraldi: aOR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.72-1.18) and a PASI score of 4 or less (Amjevita: aOR, 1.32; 95% CI, 0.96-1.84; Imraldi: aOR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.70-1.41) compared with those who continued Humira.

Conclusions and relevance: In this study, Amjevita and Imraldi were as effective as Humira for both new starters and patients switching to biosimilars from Humira.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
JAMA dermatology
JAMA dermatology DERMATOLOGY-
CiteScore
14.10
自引率
5.50%
发文量
300
期刊介绍: JAMA Dermatology is an international peer-reviewed journal that has been in continuous publication since 1882. It began publication by the American Medical Association in 1920 as Archives of Dermatology and Syphilology. The journal publishes material that helps in the development and testing of the effectiveness of diagnosis and treatment in medical and surgical dermatology, pediatric and geriatric dermatology, and oncologic and aesthetic dermatologic surgery. JAMA Dermatology is a member of the JAMA Network, a consortium of peer-reviewed, general medical and specialty publications. It is published online weekly, every Wednesday, and in 12 print/online issues a year. The mission of the journal is to elevate the art and science of health and diseases of skin, hair, nails, and mucous membranes, and their treatment, with the aim of enabling dermatologists to deliver evidence-based, high-value medical and surgical dermatologic care. The journal publishes a broad range of innovative studies and trials that shift research and clinical practice paradigms, expand the understanding of the burden of dermatologic diseases and key outcomes, improve the practice of dermatology, and ensure equitable care to all patients. It also features research and opinion examining ethical, moral, socioeconomic, educational, and political issues relevant to dermatologists, aiming to enable ongoing improvement to the workforce, scope of practice, and the training of future dermatologists. JAMA Dermatology aims to be a leader in developing initiatives to improve diversity, equity, and inclusion within the specialty and within dermatology medical publishing.
×
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