MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323351148 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwac036.175

A175 REAL-WORLD EXPERIENCE ON SWITCHING FROM ADALIMUMAB TO BIOSIMILARS IN PATIENTS WITH INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASE – AN OBSERVATIONAL STUDY FROM THREE TERTIARY CARE CENTRES

2023· article· en· W4323351148 on OpenAlexaffabout
Harjot Bedi, Daniel Eli Cohen Rosenfeld, T T Hoang, M Reise-Filteau, B Bressler, Y Leung, Sunny Singh, Margaret Rosenfeld

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicBiosimilars and Bioanalytical Methods
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's HospitalWestern UniversityKelowna General HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiosimilarMedicineAdalimumabUlcerative colitisInflammatory bowel diseaseInfliximabInternal medicineCrohn's diseaseFaecal calprotectinCalprotectinDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) is a chronic inflammatory condition of the bowel which includes ulcerative colitis (UC), Crohn’s disease (CD) or unspecific IBD (IBDu). Adalimumab (ADA), a humanized monoclonal IgG antibody against tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNFa), is an effective treatment for IBD. HumiraTM is an anti-TNFa agent that was approved by Health Canada for the treatment of IBD. In May of 2019, the British Columbia government pharmaceutical benefit plan implemented a biosimilar initiative in May 2019, mandating a non-medical switch from HumiraTM to one of the biosimilar drugs. Purpose We aimed to evaluate the real-world experience on the comparative safety and effectiveness of adalimumab biosimilar therapy after a mandatory, non-medical switch. Method We performed a retrospective chart review of all patients with IBD who either remained on HumiraTM or were switched to an adalimumab biosimilar agent, Idacio, at three tertiary care centres. Patients’ demographic data, disease status including CRP and fecal calprotectin before and after switch, and hospital visits or admission after switch were collected. Statistical analysis was performed using ANOVA and t-test. Result(s) Of the 191 patients included in the study, 145 patients underwent the provincial mandated switch from HumiraTM to a biosimilar agent, Idacio® , whereas 46 patients remained on HumiraTM. The median age at IBD diagnosis was 27 years (range 3-76 years), and at biosimilar switch was 43.5 years (15-78 years). Median disease duration prior to biosimilar switch was 13.5 years (range 0-69 years). 55.1% of patients were male, and 12.9% of patients were active smokers. CD was found in 78.9% of patients, and 19.9% of patients had UC. After biosimilar switch, adverse events, such as rash, nausea, or vomiting, were noted in 10 patients in the biosimilar group, and 7 patients required switch back to HumiraTM. All patients in the HumiraTM group stayed on that therapy. One patient stopped the biosimilar agent due to development of a new cancer requiring chemotherapy. None of the patients required IBD-related emergency department visit or hospital admission. Additionally, there was no difference in CRP or fecal calprotectin values measured before and after the biosimilar switch, and when compared to the patients who stayed on HumiraTM (p=0.48, and p=0.142, respectively). Conclusion(s) We conclude that the clinical benefit of HumiraTM was sustained after a non-medical switch to an adalimumab biosimilar. There was no risk of relapse, emergency visit, or hospital admission seen in this study. This is the first Canadian study to establish the safety and efficacy of switch to non-medical switch to an adalimumab biosimilar agent. Please acknowledge all funding agencies by checking the applicable boxes below None Disclosure of Interest None Declared

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.249 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of GastroenterologySame topicBiosimilars and Bioanalytical MethodsFrench-language works237,207