Cargando…

Comparison of the pharmacodynamic profiles of a biosimilar filgrastim and Amgen filgrastim: results from a randomized, phase I trial

Further to the patent expiry of Neupogen® (Amgen filgrastim), Hospira has developed a biosimilar filgrastim (Nivestim™) that may offer a clinically effective alternative for multiple hematologic and oncologic indications. Here results are reported from a phase I trial, primarily designed to compare...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Waller, Cornelius F., Bronchud, Miguel, Mair, Stuart, Challand, Rodeina
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer-Verlag 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2924967/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20567823
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00277-010-0973-6
_version_ 1782185640283078656
author Waller, Cornelius F.
Bronchud, Miguel
Mair, Stuart
Challand, Rodeina
author_facet Waller, Cornelius F.
Bronchud, Miguel
Mair, Stuart
Challand, Rodeina
author_sort Waller, Cornelius F.
collection PubMed
description Further to the patent expiry of Neupogen® (Amgen filgrastim), Hospira has developed a biosimilar filgrastim (Nivestim™) that may offer a clinically effective alternative for multiple hematologic and oncologic indications. Here results are reported from a phase I trial, primarily designed to compare the pharmacodynamic profiles of Hospira filgrastim and Amgen filgrastim. A phase I, single-center, double-blind, randomized trial was undertaken to demonstrate equivalence of the pharmacodynamic characteristics of Hospira filgrastim and Amgen filgrastim. Fifty healthy volunteers were randomized to receive 5 or 10 µg/kg dosing, before further randomization to treatment sequence. All volunteers received five daily subcutaneous doses of Hospira filgrastim or Neupogen, with subsequent crossover to the alternative treatment. Bioequivalence was evaluated by analysis of variance; if the estimated 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for the ratio of ‘test’ to ‘reference’ treatment means were within the conventional equivalence limits of 0.80–1.25, then bioequivalence was concluded. Forty-eight volunteers completed the study. Geometric mean absolute neutrophil count area under the curve from time 0 to the last time point at day 5 (primary endpoint) was comparable in volunteers given Hospira filgrastim or Amgen filgrastim at 5 µg/kg (ratio of means, 0.98; 90% CI, 0.92–1.05) or 10 µg/kg (ratio, 0.97; 90% CI, 0.93–1.01); 90% CIs were within the predefined range necessary to demonstrate bioequivalence. Hospira filgrastim was well tolerated with no additional safety concerns over Amgen filgrastim. Hospira filgrastim is bioequivalent with Amgen filgrastim with regard to its pharmacodynamic characteristics.
format Text
id pubmed-2924967
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher Springer-Verlag
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-29249672010-09-10 Comparison of the pharmacodynamic profiles of a biosimilar filgrastim and Amgen filgrastim: results from a randomized, phase I trial Waller, Cornelius F. Bronchud, Miguel Mair, Stuart Challand, Rodeina Ann Hematol Original Article Further to the patent expiry of Neupogen® (Amgen filgrastim), Hospira has developed a biosimilar filgrastim (Nivestim™) that may offer a clinically effective alternative for multiple hematologic and oncologic indications. Here results are reported from a phase I trial, primarily designed to compare the pharmacodynamic profiles of Hospira filgrastim and Amgen filgrastim. A phase I, single-center, double-blind, randomized trial was undertaken to demonstrate equivalence of the pharmacodynamic characteristics of Hospira filgrastim and Amgen filgrastim. Fifty healthy volunteers were randomized to receive 5 or 10 µg/kg dosing, before further randomization to treatment sequence. All volunteers received five daily subcutaneous doses of Hospira filgrastim or Neupogen, with subsequent crossover to the alternative treatment. Bioequivalence was evaluated by analysis of variance; if the estimated 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for the ratio of ‘test’ to ‘reference’ treatment means were within the conventional equivalence limits of 0.80–1.25, then bioequivalence was concluded. Forty-eight volunteers completed the study. Geometric mean absolute neutrophil count area under the curve from time 0 to the last time point at day 5 (primary endpoint) was comparable in volunteers given Hospira filgrastim or Amgen filgrastim at 5 µg/kg (ratio of means, 0.98; 90% CI, 0.92–1.05) or 10 µg/kg (ratio, 0.97; 90% CI, 0.93–1.01); 90% CIs were within the predefined range necessary to demonstrate bioequivalence. Hospira filgrastim was well tolerated with no additional safety concerns over Amgen filgrastim. Hospira filgrastim is bioequivalent with Amgen filgrastim with regard to its pharmacodynamic characteristics. Springer-Verlag 2010-06-22 2010 /pmc/articles/PMC2924967/ /pubmed/20567823 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00277-010-0973-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2010 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Waller, Cornelius F.
Bronchud, Miguel
Mair, Stuart
Challand, Rodeina
Comparison of the pharmacodynamic profiles of a biosimilar filgrastim and Amgen filgrastim: results from a randomized, phase I trial
title Comparison of the pharmacodynamic profiles of a biosimilar filgrastim and Amgen filgrastim: results from a randomized, phase I trial
title_full Comparison of the pharmacodynamic profiles of a biosimilar filgrastim and Amgen filgrastim: results from a randomized, phase I trial
title_fullStr Comparison of the pharmacodynamic profiles of a biosimilar filgrastim and Amgen filgrastim: results from a randomized, phase I trial
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of the pharmacodynamic profiles of a biosimilar filgrastim and Amgen filgrastim: results from a randomized, phase I trial
title_short Comparison of the pharmacodynamic profiles of a biosimilar filgrastim and Amgen filgrastim: results from a randomized, phase I trial
title_sort comparison of the pharmacodynamic profiles of a biosimilar filgrastim and amgen filgrastim: results from a randomized, phase i trial
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2924967/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20567823
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00277-010-0973-6
work_keys_str_mv AT wallercorneliusf comparisonofthepharmacodynamicprofilesofabiosimilarfilgrastimandamgenfilgrastimresultsfromarandomizedphaseitrial
AT bronchudmiguel comparisonofthepharmacodynamicprofilesofabiosimilarfilgrastimandamgenfilgrastimresultsfromarandomizedphaseitrial
AT mairstuart comparisonofthepharmacodynamicprofilesofabiosimilarfilgrastimandamgenfilgrastimresultsfromarandomizedphaseitrial
AT challandrodeina comparisonofthepharmacodynamicprofilesofabiosimilarfilgrastimandamgenfilgrastimresultsfromarandomizedphaseitrial