Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2020 Feb;182(2):316-326.
doi: 10.1111/bjd.18220. Epub 2019 Sep 26.

AURIEL-PsO: a randomized, double-blind phase III equivalence trial to demonstrate the clinical similarity of the proposed biosimilar MSB11022 to reference adalimumab in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic plaque-type psoriasis

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

AURIEL-PsO: a randomized, double-blind phase III equivalence trial to demonstrate the clinical similarity of the proposed biosimilar MSB11022 to reference adalimumab in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic plaque-type psoriasis

J Hercogová et al. Br J Dermatol. 2020 Feb.

Abstract

Background: MSB11022 is a proposed adalimumab biosimilar.

Objectives: To compare the efficacy, safety and immunogenicity of MSB11022 with reference adalimumab.

Methods: AURIEL-PsO was a double-blind randomized controlled equivalence trial, in which patients with moderate-to-severe chronic plaque-type psoriasis were randomized 1 : 1 to MSB11022 or reference adalimumab. The primary end point was ≥ 75% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 75) at week 16, with a prespecified equivalence interval of ± 18%. Patients with a ≥50% improvement in PASI at week 16 were eligible to enter a double-blind extension period: patients receiving MSB11022 continued treatment, and patients receiving reference adalimumab were rerandomized 1 : 1 either to continue reference adalimumab or to switch to MSB11022. Other efficacy end points and safety, immunogenicity and pharmacokinetic parameters were evaluated at scheduled visits up to weeks 52 (efficacy and immunogenicity), 54 and 66 (safety).

Results: In total, 443 patients were randomized. The difference in PASI 75 response rates at week 16 between the treatment arms was -1·9%, and the 95% confidence interval (-7·8% to 4·1%) was within the prespecified equivalence interval. No notable difference in the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was observed between treatment arms up to the end of the trial, and no new safety signals were observed. Following treatment switch at week 16, no clinically meaningful differences in safety or immunogenicity were seen between treatment arms through to the end of the observation period.

Conclusions: Therapeutic equivalence between MSB11022 and reference adalimumab was demonstrated. AURIEL-PsO provides evidence to support the similarity of both products with regard to efficacy, safety and immunogenicity. What's already known about this topic? Adalimumab is a fully human antitumour necrosis factor-α monoclonal antibody, indicated for the treatment of multiple inflammatory disorders, including psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, inflammatory bowel diseases and ankylosing spondylitis. MSB11022 is a proposed adalimumab biosimilar that has shown structural and functional similarity to the reference product in an extensive analytical comparability exercise. MSB11022 has demonstrated bioequivalence and comparable safety and immunogenicity profiles in a phase I study in healthy volunteers. What does this study add? This phase III study confirmed equivalent efficacy for MSB11022 and reference adalimumab in patients without any immunomodulation comedication in moderate-to-severe chronic plaque-type psoriasis at week 16. The efficacy, safety and immunogenicity of MSB11022 and reference adalimumab were similar over the respective observation periods (week 52 for efficacy and immunogenicity, week 66 for safety). A switch from reference adalimumab to MSB11022 at week 16 did not impact efficacy, safety or immunogenicity.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

J.H. has received honoraria for attendance at advisory boards for Novartis, Eli Lilly, LEO Pharma, Nordic Pharma, UCB, Sanofi Genzyme and Fresenius Kabi; as an investigator for AbbVie, Merck, Amgen, Novartis, Eli Lilly and Pfizer; and as a speaker for AbbVie, Biogen, Eli Lilly, Janssen‐Cilag, LEO Pharma, L'Oréal, Nordic Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre and Sanofi‐Aventis. K.A.P. has received honoraria for attendance at advisory boards for AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol‐Myers Squibb, Celgene, Dow Pharma, Eli Lilly, Fresenius Kabi, Galderma, Janssen, Merck (MSD), Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi‐Aventis/Genzyme, UCB and Valeant; as a speaker for AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galderma, Janssen, Kyowa Hakka Kirin, LEO, Merck (MSD), Novartis, Pfizer and Valeant; as a consultant for AbbVie, Akros, Amgen, Baxalta, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol‐Myers Squibb, Celgene, Coherus, Dermira, Dow Pharma, Eli Lilly, Galderma, Janssen, Kyowa Hakka Kirin, LEO, Merck (MSD), Merck‐Serono, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi‐Aventis/Genzyme, Takeda, UCB and Valeant; and for other activities for AbbVie, Akros, Amgen, Anacor, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Kyowa Hakka Kirin, Merck (MSD), Merck‐Serono, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi‐Aventis/Genzyme and Valeant; and has received grants as an investigator for AbbVie, Akros, Amgen, Anacor, Baxalta, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol‐Myers Squibb, Celgene, Coherus, Dermira, Dow Pharma, Eli Lilly, Galderma, GSK, Janssen, Kyowa Hakka Kirin, LEO, Merck (MSD), Merck‐Serono, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi‐Aventis/Genzyme, Takeda, UCB and Valeant. V.C. is a former employee of Fresenius Kabi SwissBioSim. M.U. is an employee of Fresenius Kabi SwissBioSim. P.V. has no conflicts of interest to declare. C.J.E. has received honoraria for attendance at advisory boards for AbbVie, Biogen, BMS, Celgene, Fresenius Kabi, GSK, Janssen, Lilly, Mundipharma, Roche and Sanofi; and as a consultant for Anthera, Merck and Samsung Bioepis; and has received grants as an investigator for AbbVie, Biogen and Pfizer.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Study design. *Only patients who achieved ≥ 50% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index at week 16 were eligible to enter the extended treatment period. EOW, every other week.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Patient disposition. *One patient in the MSB11022 group had a temporary treatment interruption at the time of the week 16 visit due to an adverse event, and was not counted as completing the core treatment period. This patient was included in the extension treatment period.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Response rate of ≥ 75% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 75) at week 16 in the per protocol (PP) and intention‐to‐treat (ITT) analysis sets. CI, confidence interval.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Percentage change in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) from baseline to week 16 in the per protocol (PP) and intention‐to‐treat (ITT) analysis sets. LS, least squares; CI, confidence interval.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Response rates of ≥ 50%, ≥ 75%, ≥ 90% and 100% in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 50, 75, 90 and 100) in the per protocol set. *95% confidence interval (CI) for the treatment difference between MSB11022 and reference adalimumab. NA, not applicable; ND, not determined.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Trough plasma concentrations of MSB11022 and reference adalimumab until week 52. Only patients who consented to take part in a pharmacokinetic substudy provided samples at weeks 14, 15, 25 and 33.

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Feldmann M, Maini RN. Anti‐TNF therapy, from rationale to standard of care: what lessons has it taught us? J Immunol 2010; 185:791–4. - PubMed
    1. Kaymakcalan Z, Sakorafas P, Bose S et al Comparisons of affinities, avidities, and complement activation of adalimumab, infliximab, and etanercept in binding to soluble and membrane tumor necrosis factor. Clin Immunol 2009; 131:308–16. - PubMed
    1. Lapadula G, Marchesoni A, Armuzzi A et al Adalimumab in the treatment of immune‐mediated diseases. Int J Immunopathol Pharmacol 2014; 27:33–48. - PubMed
    1. Putrik P, Ramiro S, Kvien TK et al Variations in criteria regulating treatment with reimbursed biologic DMARDs across European countries. Are differences related to country's wealth? Ann Rheum Dis 2014; 73:2010–21. - PubMed
    1. Kalo Z, Voko Z, Ostor A et al Patient access to reimbursed biological disease‐modifying antirheumatic drugs in the European region. J Mark Access Health Policy 2017; 5:1345580. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types