臨床薬理
Online ISSN : 1882-8272
Print ISSN : 0388-1601
ISSN-L : 0388-1601
Original Article
Comparison of Clinical Equivalence of Infliximab and its Biosimilar Combinations with Methotrexate in the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis
Mikiko SHIMIZUEisuke MIZUTANITsuyoshi SHIGAMasayuki HASHIGUCHI
著者情報
ジャーナル 認証あり

2022 年 53 巻 2 号 p. 15-24

詳細
抄録

Background: Recently, biological agents (BIOs) with high cost and high therapeutic efficacy have become widely available for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and the prognosis of patients has improved dramatically. However, the rising cost of medical care has become a problem, and the use of biosimilars (BS), which are cheaper than the original BIOs, is being recommended in Japan. In the current treatment of RA, BIOs such as original infliximab (IFX) or BS of IFX (IFX‒BS) are administered in combination when the effect of methotrexate (MTX) alone is insufficient. Therefore, we compared the efficacy and safety of the IFX and IFX‒BS combination therapy with MTX for RA using meta-analysis.

Methods: We conducted a literature search using the PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Ichushi web databases to compare the efficacy and safety of IFX and IFX‒BIO in MTX therapy for RA. After evaluating the quality of the articles obtained, we extracted the improvement in American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria as an index of efficacy and the number of cases of various adverse events (AEs) and discontinuations due to AEs as a safety index, and calculated the summary odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) by meta-analysis to compare the results.

Results: Using 6 clinical studies that met the final inclusion criteria for the meta-analysis, we compared the clinical equivalence of the efficacy (improvement in ACR criteria at 14 weeks, 30 weeks, 1 year, and 2 years after treatment) and safety. No significant difference was observed between 14 weeks and 1 year, but IFX‒BS was superior to original IFX at 2 years. In addition, there was no significant difference in the incidence of infection or discontinuation rate due to AEs. On the other hand, IFX‒BS tended to result in fewer infusion reactions.

Conclusions: Meta-analysis showed that there was no significant difference in efficacy and safety between the original IFX and IFX‒BS when MTX alone was ineffective in the treatment of RA, indicating clinical equivalence in efficacy and safety between IFX and IFX‒BS. However, due to the small number of trials examined in this study, further similar clinical trials need to be included in future analyses.

著者関連情報
© 2022 The Japanese Society of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
次の記事
feedback
Top