A phase III randomised, double-blind, parallel-group study comparing SB4 with etanercept reference product in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate therapy

To compare the efficacy and safety of SB4 (an etanercept biosimilar) with reference product etanercept (ETN) in patients with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) despite methotrexate (MTX) therapy. METHODS:This is a phase III, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, multicentre study with a 24-week primary endpoint. Patients with moderate to severe RA despite MTX treatment were randomised to receive weekly dose of 50 mg of subcutaneous SB4 or ETN. The primary endpoint was the American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response at week 24. Other efficacy endpoints as well as safety, immunogenicity and pharmacokinetic parameters were also measured. RESULTS: 596 patients were randomised to either SB4 (N=299) or ETN (N=297). The ACR20 response rate at week 24 in the per-protocol set was 78.1% for SB4 and 80.3% for ETN. The 95% CI of the adjusted treatment difference was -9.41% to 4.98%, which is completely contained within the predefined equivalence margin of -15% to 15%, indicating therapeutic equivalence between SB4 and ETN. Other efficacy endpoints and pharmacokinetic endpoints were comparable. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was comparable (55.2% vs 58.2%), and the incidence of antidrug antibody development up to week 24 was lower in SB4 compared with ETN (0.7% vs 13.1%). CONCLUSIONS:SB4 was shown to be equivalent with ETN in terms of efficacy at week 24. SB4 was well tolerated with a lower immunogenicity profile. The safety profile of SB4 was comparable with that of ETN

Immune Cells in Colorectal Cancer: Prognostic Relevance and Role of MSI

There is growing evidence that both local and systemic inflammatory responses play an important role in the progression of a variety of solid tumors. Colorectal cancer (CRC) results from the cumulative effect of sequential genetic alterations, leading to the expression of tumor-associated antigens possibly inducing a cellular anti-tumor immune response. It is well recognized that cytotoxic lymphocytes (CTLs) constitute one of the most important effector mechanisms of anti-tumor-immunity. However, their potential prognostic influence in CRC remains controversial. In addition, other key players like natural killer cells, tumor associated macrophages and regulatory T cells play an important role in the immune attack against CRC and need further investigation. This review will mainly focus on the role of the adaptive immune system in CRC and particularly in regard to microsatellite instability

Efficacy and Safety of Epratuzumab in Moderately to Severely Active Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: Results From Two Phase III Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE: Epratuzumab, a monoclonal antibody that targets CD22, modulates B cell signaling without substantial reductions in the number of B cells. The aim of this study was to report the results of 2 phase III multicenter randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials, the EMBODY 1 and EMBODY 2 trials, assessing the efficacy and safety of epratuzumab in patients with moderately to severely active systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). METHODS: Patients met 654 of the American College of Rheumatology revised classification criteria for SLE, were positive for antinuclear antibodies and/or anti-double-stranded DNA antibodies, had an SLE Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2K) score of 656 (increased disease activity), had British Isles Lupus Assessment Group 2004 index (BILAG-2004) scores of grade A (severe disease activity) in 651 body system or grade B (moderate disease activity) in 652 body systems (in the mucocutaneous, musculoskeletal, or cardiorespiratory domains), and were receiving standard therapy, including mandatory treatment with corticosteroids (5-60 mg/day). BILAG-2004 grade A scores in the renal and central nervous system domains were excluded. Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to receive either placebo, epratuzumab 600 mg every week, or epratuzumab 1,200 mg every other week, with infusions delivered for the first 4 weeks of each 12-week dosing cycle, for 4 cycles. Patients across all 3 treatment groups also continued with their standard therapy. The primary end point was the response rate at week 48 according to the BILAG-based Combined Lupus Assessment (BICLA) definition, requiring improvement in the BILAG-2004 score, no worsening in the BILAG-2004 score, SLEDAI-2K score, or physician's global assessment of disease activity, and no disallowed changes in concomitant medications. Patients who discontinued the study medication were classified as nonresponders. RESULTS: In the EMBODY 1 and EMBODY 2 trials of epratuzumab, 793 patients and 791 patients, respectively, were randomized, 786 (99.1%) and 788 (99.6%), respectively, received study medication, and 528 (66.6%) and 533 (67.4%), respectively, completed the study. There was no statistically significant difference in the primary end point between the groups, with the week 48 BICLA response rates being similar between the epratuzumab groups and the placebo group (response rates ranging from 33.5% to 39.8%). No new safety signals were identified. CONCLUSION: In patients with moderate or severely active SLE, treatment with epratuzumab\u2009+\u2009standard therapy did not result in improvements in response rates over that observed in the placebo\u2009+\u2009standard therapy group