Article Text
Abstract
Background and importance CT-P13 is an infliximab biosimilar that received market authorisation in the European Union in 2013. CT-P13 has undeniable cost-saving opportunities and extensive literature supporting its equivalence to originator infliximab (OI) in terms of efficacy, safety and immunogenicity. Despite these elements, CT-P13 remains largely underused in our country, either underprescribed or discontinued after its introduction.
Aim and objectives The aim of this study was to explore the reasons behind the high discontinuation rate observed among the patients on CT-P13 in a large tertiary hospital.
Material and methods A retrospective cohort study using routinely collected data was carried out. Patients were eligible if they received OI or CT-P13 between September 2017 and December 2020. They were included if they had received at least two CT-P13 infusions during the same period. Patients were excluded if their medical history was incomplete prior to or 6 months after their first CT-P13 infusion and if they had an oncological main diagnosis.
Results 156 patients were included and classified into two groups: switchers that were treated with OI and were switched to CT-P13 (n = 85, 54%) and initiators that did not receive OI prior to CT-P13 treatment (n = 71, 46%). 23 (27%) switchers and 35 (49%) initiators discontinued CT-P13 after 12 months. Main reasons for CT-P13 discontinuation were lack of efficacy (n = 21, 36%) and secondary loss of response (n = 16, 28%). Lack of active training and coordination among healthcare professionals and little patient education may have exacerbated patients’ subjective complaints and increased the CT-P13 discontinuation rate.
Conclusion and relevance Lack of efficacy and secondary loss of response were the main reasons for the high CT-P13 discontinuation rate observed in a large tertiary hospital. Coordination between the various healthcare professionals involved with the patients is a prerequisite for biosimilars to achieve their maximum cost-saving potential.
Conflict of interest No conflict of interest