Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology 6/2018

01-06-2018 | Original Article – Cancer Research

A pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics equivalence trial of the proposed pegfilgrastim biosimilar, MYL-1401H, versus reference pegfilgrastim

Authors: Cornelius F. Waller, Renger G. Tiessen, Tracey E. Lawrence, Andrew Shaw, Mark Shiyao Liu, Rajiv Sharma, Mark Baczkowski, Mudgal A. Kothekar, Catherine E. Micales, Abhijit Barve, Gopinath M. Ranganna, Eduardo J. Pennella

Published in: Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology | Issue 6/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

Pegfilgrastim is a long-acting granulocyte colony-stimulating factor indicated for prevention of febrile neutropenia in patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy by promoting neutrophil recovery.

Methods

This phase 1, randomized, double-blind, three-way crossover trial in healthy volunteers evaluated the pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), safety, and tolerability of the proposed biosimilar, comparing MYL-1401H, reference pegfilgrastim (Neulasta®, Amgen Inc, Thousand Oaks, CA, USA) sourced from the European Union, and reference pegfilgrastim sourced from the USA. Primary PK end points were peak plasma concentration of pegfilgrastim (Cmax) and area under the plasma concentration–time curve from the time of dosing to infinity (AUC0−inf). Primary PD end points were area under the curve above baseline for absolute neutrophil counts (ANC AUC0−t) and maximum change from baseline for ANC (ANC Cmax). Adverse events were also recorded.

Results

The primary PK and PD end points were similar across all groups. For the PK parameters, the 90% confidence intervals (CIs) of the ratios of geometric means ranged between 0.91 and 1.18, which were within the predefined bioequivalence interval of 0.8000 to 1.2500 for all comparisons. For the PD parameters, the 95% CIs of the ratios of geometric means ranged between 0.94 and 1.06 for all comparisons, which were within the predefined PD equivalence interval of 0.8500 to 1.1765. The safety profiles were similar, with the most common adverse events being back pain and headache.

Conclusions

MYL-1401H demonstrated similar PK, PD, and safety to reference pegfilgrastim in healthy volunteers and may be an equivalent option for the prevention of febrile neutropenia.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
go back to reference Aapro MS, Bohlius J, Cameron DA et al (2011) 2010 update of EORTC guidelines for the use of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor to reduce the incidence of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia in adult patients with lymphoproliferative disorders and solid tumours. Eur J Cancer 47:8–32CrossRefPubMed Aapro MS, Bohlius J, Cameron DA et al (2011) 2010 update of EORTC guidelines for the use of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor to reduce the incidence of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia in adult patients with lymphoproliferative disorders and solid tumours. Eur J Cancer 47:8–32CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Blackwell K, Semiglazov V, Krasnozhon D et al (2015) Comparison of EP2006, a filgrastim biosimilar, to the reference: a phase III, randomized, double-blind clinical study in the prevention of severe neutropenia in patients with breast cancer receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy. Ann Oncol 26:1948–1953CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Blackwell K, Semiglazov V, Krasnozhon D et al (2015) Comparison of EP2006, a filgrastim biosimilar, to the reference: a phase III, randomized, double-blind clinical study in the prevention of severe neutropenia in patients with breast cancer receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy. Ann Oncol 26:1948–1953CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Buchner A, Lammerich A, Abdolzade-Bavil A, Müller U, Bias P (2014) Lipegfilgrastim: pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics for body-weight-adjusted and 6 mg fixed doses in two randomized studies in healthy volunteers. Curr Med Res Opin 30:2523–2533CrossRefPubMed Buchner A, Lammerich A, Abdolzade-Bavil A, Müller U, Bias P (2014) Lipegfilgrastim: pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics for body-weight-adjusted and 6 mg fixed doses in two randomized studies in healthy volunteers. Curr Med Res Opin 30:2523–2533CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Crobu D, Spinetti G, Schrepfer R et al (2014) Preclinical and clinical phase I studies of a new recombinant filgrastim (BK0023) in comparison with Neupogen®. BMC Pharmacol Toxicol 15:7CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Crobu D, Spinetti G, Schrepfer R et al (2014) Preclinical and clinical phase I studies of a new recombinant filgrastim (BK0023) in comparison with Neupogen®. BMC Pharmacol Toxicol 15:7CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Dale DC (2002) Colony-stimulating factors for the management of neutropenia in cancer patients. Drugs 62(suppl 1):1–15CrossRefPubMed Dale DC (2002) Colony-stimulating factors for the management of neutropenia in cancer patients. Drugs 62(suppl 1):1–15CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference del Giglio A, Eniu A, Ganea-Motan D, Topuzov E, Lubenau H (2008) XM02 is superior to placebo and equivalent to Neupogen™ in reducing the duration of severe neutropenia and the incidence of febrile neutropenia in cycle I in breast cancer patients receiving docetaxel/doxorubicin chemotherapy. BMC Cancer 8:332CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral del Giglio A, Eniu A, Ganea-Motan D, Topuzov E, Lubenau H (2008) XM02 is superior to placebo and equivalent to Neupogen™ in reducing the duration of severe neutropenia and the incidence of febrile neutropenia in cycle I in breast cancer patients receiving docetaxel/doxorubicin chemotherapy. BMC Cancer 8:332CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Gascon P, Fuhr U, Sörgel F et al (2010) Development of a new G-CSF product based on biosimilarity assessment. Ann Oncol 21:1419–1429CrossRefPubMed Gascon P, Fuhr U, Sörgel F et al (2010) Development of a new G-CSF product based on biosimilarity assessment. Ann Oncol 21:1419–1429CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Green MD, Koelbl H, Baselga J et al (2003) A randomized double-blind multicenter phase III study of fixed-dose single-administration pegfilgrastim versus daily filgrastim in patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy. Ann Oncol 14:29–35CrossRefPubMed Green MD, Koelbl H, Baselga J et al (2003) A randomized double-blind multicenter phase III study of fixed-dose single-administration pegfilgrastim versus daily filgrastim in patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy. Ann Oncol 14:29–35CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Harbeck N, Lipatov O, Frolova M et al (2016) Randomized, double-blind study comparing proposed biosimilar LA-EP2006 with reference pegfilgrastim in breast cancer. Future Oncol 12:1359–1367CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Harbeck N, Lipatov O, Frolova M et al (2016) Randomized, double-blind study comparing proposed biosimilar LA-EP2006 with reference pegfilgrastim in breast cancer. Future Oncol 12:1359–1367CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Holmes FA, Jones SE, O’Shaughnessy J et al (2002a) Comparable efficacy and safety profiles of once-per-cycle pegfilgrastim and daily injection filgrastim in chemotherapy-induced neutropenia: a multicenter dose-finding study in women with breast cancer. Ann Oncol 13:903–909CrossRefPubMed Holmes FA, Jones SE, O’Shaughnessy J et al (2002a) Comparable efficacy and safety profiles of once-per-cycle pegfilgrastim and daily injection filgrastim in chemotherapy-induced neutropenia: a multicenter dose-finding study in women with breast cancer. Ann Oncol 13:903–909CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Holmes FA, O’Shaughnessy JA, Vukelja S et al (2002b) Blinded, randomized, multicenter study to evaluate single administration pegfilgrastim once per cycle versus daily filgrastim as an adjunct to chemotherapy in patients with high-risk stage II or stage III/IV breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 20:727–731CrossRefPubMed Holmes FA, O’Shaughnessy JA, Vukelja S et al (2002b) Blinded, randomized, multicenter study to evaluate single administration pegfilgrastim once per cycle versus daily filgrastim as an adjunct to chemotherapy in patients with high-risk stage II or stage III/IV breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 20:727–731CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Kuderer NM (2011) Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor prophylaxis in adult cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. Cancer Treat Res 157:127–143CrossRefPubMed Kuderer NM (2011) Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor prophylaxis in adult cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. Cancer Treat Res 157:127–143CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Minghetti P, Rocco P, Cilurzo F, Del Vecchio L, Locatelli F (2012) The regulatory framework of biosimilars in the European Union. Drug Discov Today 17:63–70CrossRefPubMed Minghetti P, Rocco P, Cilurzo F, Del Vecchio L, Locatelli F (2012) The regulatory framework of biosimilars in the European Union. Drug Discov Today 17:63–70CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Neulasta [package insert] (2016) Amgen Inc, Thousand Oaks Neulasta [package insert] (2016) Amgen Inc, Thousand Oaks
go back to reference NEUPOGEN [package insert] (2016) Amgen Inc, Thousand Oaks NEUPOGEN [package insert] (2016) Amgen Inc, Thousand Oaks
go back to reference Park KH, Sohn JH, Lee S et al (2013) A randomized, multi-center, open-label, phase II study of once-per-cycle DA-3031, a biosimilar pegylated G-CSF, compared with daily filgrastim in patients receiving TAC chemotherapy for early-stage breast cancer. Invest New Drugs 31:1300–1306CrossRefPubMed Park KH, Sohn JH, Lee S et al (2013) A randomized, multi-center, open-label, phase II study of once-per-cycle DA-3031, a biosimilar pegylated G-CSF, compared with daily filgrastim in patients receiving TAC chemotherapy for early-stage breast cancer. Invest New Drugs 31:1300–1306CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Raedler LA (2016) Zarxio (filgrastim-sndz): first biosimilar approved in the United States. Am Health Drug Benefits 9(spec feature):150–154PubMedPubMedCentral Raedler LA (2016) Zarxio (filgrastim-sndz): first biosimilar approved in the United States. Am Health Drug Benefits 9(spec feature):150–154PubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Smith TJ, Bohlke K, Lyman GH et al (2015) Recommendations for the use of WBC growth factors: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline update. J Clin Oncol 33:3199–3212CrossRefPubMed Smith TJ, Bohlke K, Lyman GH et al (2015) Recommendations for the use of WBC growth factors: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline update. J Clin Oncol 33:3199–3212CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Waller CF, Bronchud M, Mair S, Challand R (2010a) Comparison of the pharmacodynamic profiles of a biosimilar filgrastim and Amgen filgrastim: results from a randomized, phase I trial. Ann Hematol 89:971–978CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Waller CF, Bronchud M, Mair S, Challand R (2010a) Comparison of the pharmacodynamic profiles of a biosimilar filgrastim and Amgen filgrastim: results from a randomized, phase I trial. Ann Hematol 89:971–978CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
go back to reference Waller CF, Semiglazov VF, Tjulandin S, Bentsion D, Chan S, Challand R (2010b) A phase III randomized equivalence study of biosimilar filgrastim versus Amgen filgrastim in patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy for breast cancer. Onkologie 33:504–511PubMed Waller CF, Semiglazov VF, Tjulandin S, Bentsion D, Chan S, Challand R (2010b) A phase III randomized equivalence study of biosimilar filgrastim versus Amgen filgrastim in patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy for breast cancer. Onkologie 33:504–511PubMed
Metadata
Title
A pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics equivalence trial of the proposed pegfilgrastim biosimilar, MYL-1401H, versus reference pegfilgrastim
Authors
Cornelius F. Waller
Renger G. Tiessen
Tracey E. Lawrence
Andrew Shaw
Mark Shiyao Liu
Rajiv Sharma
Mark Baczkowski
Mudgal A. Kothekar
Catherine E. Micales
Abhijit Barve
Gopinath M. Ranganna
Eduardo J. Pennella
Publication date
01-06-2018
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology / Issue 6/2018
Print ISSN: 0171-5216
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1335
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00432-018-2643-3

Other articles of this Issue 6/2018

Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology 6/2018 Go to the issue
Live Webinar | 27-06-2024 | 18:00 (CEST)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

WHO estimates that half of all patients worldwide are non-adherent to their prescribed medication. The consequences of poor adherence can be catastrophic, on both the individual and population level.

Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.

Prof. Kevin Dolgin
Prof. Florian Limbourg
Prof. Anoop Chauhan
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Highlights from the ACC 2024 Congress

Year in Review: Pediatric cardiology

Watch Dr. Anne Marie Valente present the last year's highlights in pediatric and congenital heart disease in the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Pulmonary vascular disease

The last year's highlights in pulmonary vascular disease are presented by Dr. Jane Leopold in this official video from ACC.24.

Year in Review: Valvular heart disease

Watch Prof. William Zoghbi present the last year's highlights in valvular heart disease from the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discusses last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.