Autoimmune myasthenia gravis is typically treated with surgery, acetylcholine esterase inhibitors, corticosteroids, and immunosuppressive drugs like azathioprine and mycophenolate mofetil. Some patients have refractory disease and may require therapies like eculizumab (Soliris), which, while effective, is a particularly high-cost biologic that has no approved biosimilars in Europe or the United States, although biosimilars are advancing through clinical development. Rituximab, however, which is lower-cost than eculizumab and has multiple approved biosimilars, has also emerged as a promising treatment.
Autoimmune myasthenia gravis (MG) is typically treated with surgery, acetylcholine esterase inhibitors, corticosteroids, and immunosuppressive drugs like azathioprine and mycophenolate mofetil. Some patients have refractory disease and may require therapies like eculizumab (Soliris), which, while effective, is a particularly high-cost biologic that has no approved biosimilars in Europe or the United States, although biosimilars are advancing through clinical development.
Rituximab, however, which is lower-cost than eculizumab and has multiple approved biosimilars, has also emerged as a promising treatment.
A number of case reports and retrospective studies have shown that rituximab is safe and effective in patients with MG, but optimal dosing has not been established, and regimens adapted from treatment for non-Hodgkin lymphoma have been used. However, based on emerging evidence, low-dose rituximab, administered at 6-month intervals, may be noninferior and may improve the cost-effectiveness of using rituximab in these patients.
A paper published recently in Therapeutic Advances in Neurological Disorders reports on a study that evaluated the efficacy and safety of repeated low-dose rituximab treatment, individualized by monitoring of CD19-positive B cells, in patients with MG that proved refractory to other treatments.
In the retrospective review of 17 patients with MG who were treated with rituximab at 2 teaching hospitals between 2013 and 2017, the treatment protocol comprised induction treatment with low-dose rituximab at a dose of 375 mg/m2 twice with a 2-week period followed by retreatment based on either B-cell repopulation or clinical relapse.
Following rituximab treatment, 11 patients achieved the primary end point of minimal manifestation or better with prednisolone at a dose of 5 mg per day or less after a median of 7.6 months (range, 2-17 months). Over a median follow-up of 24 months (range, 7-49 months), 30 retreatments were given. Six of these retreatments were on the basis of relapse without B-cell repopulation, 16 were given on the basis of repopulation without relapse, and 8 were given on the basis of both repopulation and relapse.
On a group level, say the researchers, B-cell recovery appeared to occur in parallel with relapse, but on an individual level, the association was modest.
“Considering the limited data on the optimal rituximab dose and retreatment schedule, our results are encouraging and have therapeutic implications for refractory MG,” write the authors. “Given the reduced costs and possibly lower risk of adverse effects, we propose that repeated treatment with low-dose rituximab guided by monitoring circulating B cells could be a cost-effective therapeutic option in patients with refractory MG.”
Reference
Choi K, Hong YH, Ahn SH, et al. Repeated low-dose rituximab treatment based on the assessment of circulating B cells in patients with refractory myasthenia gravis [published online September 18, 2019]. Ther Adv Neurol Disord. doi: 10.1177/1756286419871187.
Physician and Patient Perspectives After Starting or Switching to Amgevita in IBD
March 23rd 2024A real-world study surveying physicians and patients on adalimumab biosimilar ABP 501 (Amgevita) in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) found both patients initiating ABP 501 and those who had switched from the reference product had higher satisfaction levels.
What AmerisourceBergen's Report Reveals About Payers, Biosimilar Pricing Trends
May 28th 2023On this episode of Not So Different, Tasmina Hydery and Brian Biehn from AmerisourceBergen discussed results from a recent survey, that were also presented at Asembia 2023, diving into the payer perspective on biosimilars and current pricing trends across the US biosimilar industry.
The Role of Biosimilars: Advancing Access, Financial Health, and System Sustainability
March 11th 2024Kashyap Patel, MD, CEO of Carolina Blood and Cancer Care, a member of the Community Oncology Alliance, and member of The Center for Biosimilars® Advisory Board, glances back at the development of the biosimilar industry and the last 5 years of progress.
Pipelines and Preparation: How the US Can Prepare for More RA Biosimilars
April 16th 2023What can practices do to prepare for all the biosimilars to treat rheumatoid arthritis (RA) coming down the pipeline? And how can they ensure that the lower-than-anticipated adoption rates for infliximab biosimilars are not repeated? Robert Zutaut, RPh, from McKesson Provider Solutions, tackles all this and more on this episode of Not So Different.
Cardinal Health Report Showcases Biosimilar Growth, Provider and Payer Evolution, and More
February 29th 2024In its annual biosimilars report, Cardinal Health provided updates on how provider acceptance growth, evolving payer dynamics, and the growing pipeline for biosimilars will shape the biosimilar landscape over the next 5 years.
Biosimilar Substitution Within OCM Could Result in Lower Total Cost of Care
February 16th 2024Researchers found that the total cost of care per oncology episode was significantly lowered when biosimilar substitution was implemented in Medicare’s Oncology Care Model (OCM), suggesting that biosimilar uptake can serve as a critical tool to mitigate risk and improve financial performance for providers.