Abstract:Abstract Background: This double-blind, active-controlled, randomized, multicenter phase III study evaluated the efficacy, safety and immunogenicity of GB242, an infliximab biosimilar, vs infliximab (Remicade®) reference product in patients with moderate to severe active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) combination with methotrexate (MTX) therapy.Methods: Patients randomised in a 1:1 ratio to receive either GB242 or INF (3 mg/kg intravenous at weeks 0, 2, 6, 14 and 22). MTX was given as an oral weekly dose of 10–25 mg/week with folic acid of 5–10 mg/week, 30 times totally. The primary end point was the American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response rate at week 30. Therapeutic equivalence of clinical response according to ACR20 criteria was declared if the two-sided 95% CI for the treatment difference was within ±14%. Statistical analysis was also performed with a two-sided 95% CI using ±14% margin. Secondary endpoints included the proportion of patients achieving a week 30 ACR 50 response, ACR70 response, change in Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28), as well as safety and immunogenicity of GB242.Results: 570 subjects were randomized into GB242 (N=285) or INF (N=285). Finally, 283 subjects in each group were analysed. The primary endpoint was the ACR20 response. In the full analysis population, 177 (62.54%) of 283 patients in the GB242 group (95% CI 56.62% – 68.20%) and 161 (56.89%) of 283 patients in the INF group (95% CI 50.90% – 62.74%) reached ACR20 at week 30. The difference between the two groups was 5.65% with a 95% CI of -2.48 to 13.74, which was within the predefined equivalence margin. The ACR20 response was also similarly shown in the PPS; ACR20 was 71.73% for GB242 and 66.52% for INF, respectively. The difference between the two groups was 5.21% with a 95% CI of -3.33 to 13.6, which was within the predefined equivalence margin. The second endpoints outcomes such as ACR50 response rate, ACR70 response rate and DAS28 were similar between GB242 and INF. ACR50 response for the FAS was 37.12% for GB242 and 32.86% for INF，ACR50 response for the PPS was 42.62% for GB242 and 38.63% for INF. ACR70 response for the FAS was 19.79% for GB242 and 16.96% for INF, ACR70 response for the PPS was 22.78% for GB242 and 20.63% for INF, respectively. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was comparable (77.4% in GB242 vs 80.2% in INF) and detection of antidrug antibodies (ADA) to infliximab up to week 30 (60.8% in GB242 vs 59.4% in INF) was comparable.Conclusions: The efficacy of GB242 appeared to be slightly better than that of INF in terms of ACR20, ACR50, ACR70 at week 30, but the difference was not statistically significant. Moreover, GB242 was well tolerated, with a similar immunogenicity and safety profile comparable to INF. Trial registration: CTR20170127, registered 28 July 2017; NCT04178850, registered 26 Nov 2017-Retrospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04178850?term=GB242&draw=2&rank=1

Efficacy and safety of biosimilar infliximab in bio-naïve patients with Crohn's disease

Real-World Safety and Efficacy of Biosimilar CT-P13 in Patients with Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases: Integrated Analysis of Three Japanese Prospective Observational Studies

Efficacy and safety of biosimilar versus originator infliximab in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: A real-world cohort analysis

The PROSIT-BIO Cohort: A Prospective Observational Study of Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease Treated with Infliximab Biosimilar

Real-world effectiveness and safety of CT-P13, an infliximab biosimilar, for inflammatory bowel diseases: A prospective national observational cohort study (ReFLECT study)

Real-world observational cohort study of treatment patterns and safety outcomes of infliximab biosimilar CT-P13 for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (CONNECT-IBD)

Comparison of endoscopic healing and durability between infliximab originator and CT-P13 in pediatric patients with inflammatory bowel disease

Subcutaneous Infliximab [CT-P13], a True Biologic 2.0. Real Clinical Practice Multicentre Study

Long-term effectiveness and safety of infliximab-biosimilar: A multicenter Phoenix retrospective cohort study

The PROSIT Cohort of Infliximab Biosimilar in IBD: A Prolonged Follow-up on the Effectiveness and Safety Across Italy

Clinical efficacy of infliximab in the treatment of 62 cases with Crohn's disease

Multiple infliximab biosimilar switches appear to be safe and effective in a real-world inflammatory bowel disease cohort

Evaluation of persistence, retention "rate" and prescription pattern of original infliximab and infliximab CT-P13 in biologic-naïve patients with ulcerative colitis

Switching from originator infliximab to biosimilar CT-P13 compared with maintained treatment with originator infliximab (NOR-SWITCH): a 52-week, randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority trial

P938 Effectiveness and safety of switching from original infliximab to GP1111 biosimilar in inflammatory bowel diseases – prospective, cohort study

Efficacy and safety of subcutaneous infliximab versus adalimumab, etanercept and intravenous infliximab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis

Comparative efficacy of subcutaneous (CT-P13) and intravenous infliximab in adult patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a network meta-regression of individual patient data from two randomised trials

Prediction of Short- and Medium-term Efficacy of Biosimilar Infliximab Therapy. Do Trough Levels and Antidrug Antibody Levels or Clinical And Biochemical Markers Play the More Important Role?

Efficacy and Safety of CT-P13 as First- and Second-Line Treatment in Patients with Ankylosing Spondylitis

Efficacy of Infliximab Biosimilar for Maintenance Therapy in Pediatric Inflammatory Bowel Disease Following Infliximab Originator

Fine comparision of the efficacy and safety between GB242 and infliximab in patients with active moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis: a randomized, double-blind, phase III study