Cargando…
Randomized, double-blind study comparing proposed biosimilar LA-EP2006 with reference pegfilgrastim in breast cancer
AIM: This randomized, double-blind trial compared proposed biosimilar LA-EP2006 with reference pegfilgrastim in women receiving chemotherapy for breast cancer (PROTECT-1). PATIENTS & METHODS: Women (≥18 years) were randomized to receive LA-EP2006 (n = 159) or reference (n = 157) pegfilgrastim (N...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Future Medicine Ltd
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5705792/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27020170 http://dx.doi.org/10.2217/fon-2016-0016 |
Sumario: | AIM: This randomized, double-blind trial compared proposed biosimilar LA-EP2006 with reference pegfilgrastim in women receiving chemotherapy for breast cancer (PROTECT-1). PATIENTS & METHODS: Women (≥18 years) were randomized to receive LA-EP2006 (n = 159) or reference (n = 157) pegfilgrastim (Neulasta(®), Amgen) for ≤6 cycles of (neo)-adjuvant TAC chemotherapy. Primary end point was duration of severe neutropenia (DSN) during cycle 1 (number of consecutive days with absolute neutrophil count <0.5 × 10(9)/l) with equivalence confirmed if 90% and 95% CIs were within a ±1 day margin. RESULTS: For DSN, LA-EP2006 was equivalent to reference (difference: 0.07 days; 90% CI: -0.09–0.23; 95% CI: -0.12–0.26). CONCLUSION: LA-EP2006 and reference pegfilgrastim showed no clinically meaningful differences regarding efficacy and safety in breast cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. |
---|