Biosimilar filgrastim is used to prevent chemotherapy-induced neutropenia and febrile neutropenia, but there exist only limited observational data concerning the use of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor treatments in patients who have non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, including sub-types such as diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.
Biosimilar filgrastim is used to prevent chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN) and febrile neutropenia (FN), but observational data are limited on the use of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) treatments in patients who have non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, including sub-types such as diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL).
A recent pan-European, multi-center, prospective, observational study, the results of which were published in a June 2017 issue supplement of Hematological Oncology, examined the treatment patterns and clinical outcomes of patients who received biosimilar filgrastim to prevent CIN and FN, and to describe outcomes for patients who have DLBCL.
The study cohort included a total of 245 patients who had either stage 3 (42%) or stage 4 (58%) DLBCL. The patients received up to 6 cycles of chemotherapy. The results of the study were as follows:
Among adverse events (AEs), patients most frequently reported bone pain (2.9%, n = 7), arthralgia (0.8%, n = 2), and back pain (.08%, n = 2). Other AEs, each reported by 0.4% of patients (n = 1), included increased blood alkaline phosphate, constipation, acute hepatitis, musculoskeletal pain, and pyrexia.
The researchers concluded that the biosimilar filgrastim’s efficacy and safety in real-life practice in patients with DLBCL was similar to that of the reference filgrastim. They belive that these data support the use of biosimilar filgrastim in real-world practice, and that biosimilars present an opportunity to increase the sustainability of cancer treatment.
The study findings echo those of other recent studies that have supported the safety and efficacy of biosimilar filgrastim, including those that demonstrated no significant differences between biosimilar and reference filgrastim in the mobilization of peripheral blood stem cells, and no clinically meaningful differences in patients who switched between biosimilar filgrastim and its reference.
Budget Impact Analysis of Biosimilar Natalizumab in the US
Projected savings from biosimilar natalizumab were $452,611 over 3 years, driven by decreased drug acquisition costs and a utilization shift from reference to biosimilar natalizumab.
Biosimilars in America: Overcoming Barriers and Maximizing Impact
July 21st 2024Join us as we explore the complexities of the US biosimilars market, discussing legislative influences, payer and provider adoption factors, and strategies to overcome industry challenges with expert insights from Kyle Noonan, PharmD, MS, value & access strategy manager at Cencora.
Eye on Pharma: BI Cyltezo Partnership; Europe Ustekinumab Launch; Mexico Biosimilar Approval
July 24th 2024Boehringer Ingelheim (BI) partners with GoodRx to offer its unbranded adalimumab biosimilar to patients at an exclusive low price; a new ustekinumab biosimilar launches in Europe; and Mexican officials approve a bevacizumab biosimilar.
Biosimilars Oncology Roundup for June 2024—Podcast Edition
July 7th 2024On this episode of Not So Different, we review biosimilar news coming out of June, with clinical trial results from conferences and a study showcasing how to overcome economic and noneconomic barriers to oncology biosimilars.
Real-World Study: No Increase in Health Resource Costs After Infliximab Biosimilar Introduction
July 20th 2024Although biosimilars reduce drug purchasing costs for hospitals, it’s unclear whether those savings might be offset by increased health resource utilization following a non-medical switching initiative.