Comparative efficacy and safety of biosimilar infliximab and other biological treatments in ankylosing spondylitis: systematic literature review and meta-analysis
-
Published:2014-05
Issue:S1
Volume:15
Page:45-52
-
ISSN:1618-7598
-
Container-title:The European Journal of Health Economics
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Eur J Health Econ
Author:
Baji Petra,Péntek Márta,Szántó Sándor,Géher Pál,Gulácsi László,Balogh Orsolya,Brodszky Valentin
Abstract
Abstract
Objectives
To compare the efficacy and safety of infliximab-biosimilar with other biological drugs for the treatment of active ankylosing spondylitis (AS).
Methods
Systematic literature review for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with adalimumab, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab and infliximab-biosimilar in AS was performed and indirect meta-analysis (Bayesian mixed treatment comparison) was carried out. The proportion of patients reaching 20 % improvement by the assessment of Spondyloarthritis International Society response criteria (ASAS20) at weeks 12 and 24 was used as efficacy endpoints, and the occurrence of serious adverse events at week 24 was applied to compare the safety of the biologicals.
Results
Altogether, 13 RCTs, identified by the systematic literature search, were included in the analysis. Results on the ASAS20 efficacy endpoint were reported for week 12 in 12 RCTs involving 2,395 patients, and for week 24 in 5 RCTs comprising 1,337 patients. All the five biological agents proved to be significantly superior to placebo. Infliximab showed the highest odds ratio (OR) of 7.2 (95 % CI 3.68–13.19) compared to placebo, followed by infliximab-biosimilar with OR 6.25 (95 % CI 2.55–13.14), both assessed at week 24. No significant difference was found between infliximab-biosimilar and other biological treatments regarding their efficacy and safety.
Conclusions
This is the first study which includes a biosimilar drug in the meta-analysis of biological treatments in AS. The results have proven the similar efficacy and safety profile of infliximab-biosimilar treatment compared to other biologicals.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Health Policy,Economics, Econometrics and Finance (miscellaneous)
Reference32 articles.
1. Péntek, M., Poór, Gy., Wiland, P., Martina, O., Brzosko, M., Codrenau, C., Brodszky, N., Gulácsi, L.: Biologic therapy in inflammatory rheumatic diseases: issues in Central and Eastern European countries. Eur. J. Health Econ. (2014). doi:10.1007/s10198-014-0592-6 2. Park, W., Hrycaj, P., Jeka, S., Kovalenko, V., Lysenko, G., Miranda, P., Mikazane, H., Gutierrez-Urena, S., Lim, M., Lee, Y.A., Lee, S.J., Kim, H., Yoo, D.H., Braun, J.: A randomised, double-blind, multicentre, parallel-group, prospective study comparing the pharmacokinetics, safety, and efficacy of CT-P13 and innovator infliximab in patients with ankylosing spondylitis: the PLANETAS study. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 72(10), 1605–1612 (2013) 3. Sieper, J., Rudwaleit, M., Baraliakos, X., Brandt, J., Braun, J., Burgos-Vargas, R., Dougados, M., Hermann, K.G., Landewe, R., Maksymowych, W., van der Heijde, D.: The Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS) handbook: a guide to assess spondyloarthritis. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 68(Suppl 2), ii1–ii44 (2009) 4. Migliore, A., Broccoli, S., Bizzi, E., Lagana, B.: Indirect comparison of the effects of anti-TNF biological agents in patients with ankylosing spondylitis by means of a mixed treatment comparison performed on efficacy data from published randomised, controlled trials. J. Med. Econ. 15(3), 473–480 (2012) 5. Ades, A.E., Sculpher, M., Sutton, A., Abrams, K., Cooper, N., Welton, N., Lu, G.: Bayesian methods for evidence synthesis in cost-effectiveness analysis. Pharmacoeconomics 24(1), 1–19 (2006)
Cited by
28 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|