Fine Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety Between GB242 and Infliximab in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Phase III Study

Capital Medical University,Liu Shengyun,Liu Lin,Gong Xiaowei,Liu Ju,Sun Lingyun,Liu Xiumei,Wu Lijun,Chen Linjie,Wang Ling,Luo Li,Lin Jinying,Tie Ning,Jiang Zhenyu,Wu Jian,Lu Fuai,Sun Hongsheng,Li Xiaomei,Yang Niansheng,Chai Kexia,Wei Hua,Da Zhanyun,Zhao Cheng,Dai Lie,Wang Youlian,Shi Guixiu,Zhang Zhenchun,Song Hui,Guo Qian,Liu Yingxue Cathy,Li Zhanguo
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40744-021-00396-8
2021-01-01
Rheumatology and Therapy
Abstract:This phase III trial (NCT04178850) 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. Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either GB242 or INF (3 mg/kg). Therapeutic equivalence of clinical response according to the American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response rate at week 30 was declared if the two-sided 95% CI for the treatment difference was within ± 14%. The comparison of GB242 with INF also 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. A total of 570 subjects were randomized into GB242 (N = 285) or INF (N = 285) and 283 subjects in each group were analyzed. At week 30, the ACR20 was 62.54% for the GB242 group (95% CI 56.62–68.20%) and 56.89% for the INF group (95% CI 50.90–62.74%). The difference between the two groups was 5.65% with a 95% CI of – 2.48 to 13.74. ACR50 response was 37.12% for GB242 and 32.86% for INF at week 30. ACR70 response was 19.79% for GB242 and 16.96% for INF at week 30, 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. GB242 demonstrated equivalent efficacy to INF at week 30. Moreover, GB242 was well tolerated, with a similar immunogenicity and safety profile comparable to INF.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?