A Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase III Study in India for Comparing Efficacy, Safety, and PK of ZRC-3277 (Pertuzumab Biosimilar) With Perjeta® in Patients With HER2-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer

Rushabh Kothari,Maulik Doshi,P K Chaithanya,Satheesh Ct,Anil Kumar,Krishna Mohan Mallavarapu,Rajnish Nagarkar,Vijay Mahobia,Niraj Bhatt,K L Priyadarshini,Ajay Gogia,Tanveer Maksud,Saurabh Prasad,K Velavan,Rajeev L K,Prakash Ss,Vikas Talreja,Kaushal Kalra,Bhushan Nemade,Aloke Ghosh Dastidar,Tarachand Gupta,Tushar Patil,Shailesh Bondarde,Pinakin Patel,Sudeep Gupta,Ghanashyam Biswas,Manan Vaghela,Pinaki Mahato,Honey Parekh,Mahesh Kalloli,Rachan Shetty,Gaurav Prakash,Anil Goel,Srikrishna Mandal,Tamohan Choudhury,Minish Jain,Chanchal Goswami,Yathish Kumar H M,K K Mukherjee,Rahul Shrivastava,Deven Parmar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clbc.2024.07.001
Abstract:Introduction: To evaluate the efficacy, safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity of ZRC-3277 (pertuzumab biosimilar) with Perjeta® (pertuzumab) in previously untreated patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Patients and methods: This phase III, multicenter, double-blind study across 38 sites in India randomized (1:1) patients with HER2-positive MBC in either the ZRC-3277 or Perjeta® group. Both groups also received trastuzumab and docetaxel. Of 268 enrolled patients, mITT population had 243 patients (119 and 124 in the ZRC-3277 and Perjeta® groups, respectively). The primary objective was to compare the between-group objective response rate (ORR) after 6 cycles of treatment. ORR was determined by evaluating scans of computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging following Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumor (RECIST 1.1). Two-sided 95% confidence interval (95% CI) for the difference in ORR was determined to evaluate the noninferiority of ZRC-3277 to Perjeta®. The secondary outcomes included the assessment of PK, immunogenicity, and safety between the 2 groups. Results: In the mITT population, 104 (87.39%) and 114 (91.94%) participants achieved the ORR in the ZRC-3277 and Perjeta® groups, respectively. For predefined -15% noninferiority margin, obtained 2-sided 95% CIs (-12.19%, 3.11%) for the difference in ORR (-4.55%) between the 2 groups demonstrated the noninferiority of ZRC-3277 to Perjeta®. PK, immunogenicity, and safety were not significantly different between the 2 groups. Conclusion: Efficacy, PK, immunogenicity, and safety profiles of ZRC-3277 was found to be similar to those of Perjeta®.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?