BACKGROUND/AIMS: An interim analysis of post-marketing surveillance of CT-P13, an infliximab biosimilar, was performed to evaluate its safety and efficacy in Japanese patients with inflammatory bowel disease.METHODS: Patients were prospectively enrolled between November 2014 and March 2017, after the launch of CT-P13 in Japan, and case report forms of patients followed for at least 4 months were analyzed as of July 2018.RESULTS: Of 523 patients in the analysis set, 372 remained on CT-P13 therapy, while 54 (20.2%) of 267 patients with Crohn’s disease, and 97 (37.9%) of 256 patients with ulcerative colitis were withdrawn during follow-up. A total of 144 adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were reported in 106 patients (20.3%). Infusion reaction was the most frequent ADR observed in 49 patients (9.4%). Efficacy parameters decreased immediately after the start of treatment in naïve patients to anti-tumor necrosis factor-α antibody. In the patients switched from originator infliximab for nonmedical reasons, the decreased parameters due to proceeded treatment with the originator were maintained in low ranges, and the treatment continuation rate was high with low ADR incidence. In contrast, in patients switched for medical reasons such as adverse event or loss of response, the incidence of ADRs was high. However, the efficacy parameters were improved, and the treatment continuation rate was not significantly different from that of the naïve patient group.CONCLUSIONS: In this interim analysis, CT-P13 was comparable to the originator infliximab with respect to ADRs and efficacy, and is therefore considered to be a cost-efficient interchangeable biosimilar for Japanese patients with inflammatory bowel disease.
Asian Continental Ancestry Group ; Colitis, Ulcerative ; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; Incidence ; Inflammatory Bowel Diseases ; Infliximab ; Japan ; Necrosis ; Prospective Studies

Background/Aims: Esophageal motility disorders (EMDs) contribute to the pathophysiology of gastroesophageal reflux disease. However, the causes of EMDs and their impact on gastroesophageal reflux disease-associated symptoms remain unknown. This study aims to elucidate clinical features associated with various types of EMDs in patients with heartburn symptoms. Methods: Of the 511 patients who underwent high-resolution manometry, 394 who were evaluated for heartburn symptoms were examined. Patients subjected to high-resolution manometry were classified into 4 groups: outflow obstruction group, hypermotility group, hypomotility group, and normal motility group. Symptoms were evaluated using 3 questionnaires. Patient characteristics and symptoms for each EMD type were compared with those of the normal motility group. Results: Of the 394 patients, 193 (48.9%) were diagnosed with EMDs, including 71 with outflow obstruction, 15 with hypermotility, and 107 with hypomotility. The mean dysphagia score was significantly higher in each of the 3 EMD groups compared with those with normal motility. The mean acid reflux and dyspepsia scores were significantly lower in the outflow obstruction group (P < 0.05). The mean body mass index and median Brinkman index were significantly higher in the hypermotility group (P = 0.001 and P = 0.018, respectively), whereas the mean diarrhea and constipation scores were significantly lower in the hypomotility group (P < 0.05). Conclusions The results of our study indicate that different EMDs have distinct characteristics. Cigarette smoking and high body mass index were associated with esophageal hypermotility. Assessment of the dysphagia symptom scores may help identify patients with EMDs.

Background/Aims: Esophageal motility disorders (EMDs) contribute to the pathophysiology of gastroesophageal reflux disease. However, the causes of EMDs and their impact on gastroesophageal reflux disease-associated symptoms remain unknown. This study aims to elucidate clinical features associated with various types of EMDs in patients with heartburn symptoms. Methods: Of the 511 patients who underwent high-resolution manometry, 394 who were evaluated for heartburn symptoms were examined. Patients subjected to high-resolution manometry were classified into 4 groups: outflow obstruction group, hypermotility group, hypomotility group, and normal motility group. Symptoms were evaluated using 3 questionnaires. Patient characteristics and symptoms for each EMD type were compared with those of the normal motility group. Results: Of the 394 patients, 193 (48.9%) were diagnosed with EMDs, including 71 with outflow obstruction, 15 with hypermotility, and 107 with hypomotility. The mean dysphagia score was significantly higher in each of the 3 EMD groups compared with those with normal motility. The mean acid reflux and dyspepsia scores were significantly lower in the outflow obstruction group (P < 0.05). The mean body mass index and median Brinkman index were significantly higher in the hypermotility group (P = 0.001 and P = 0.018, respectively), whereas the mean diarrhea and constipation scores were significantly lower in the hypomotility group (P < 0.05). Conclusions The results of our study indicate that different EMDs have distinct characteristics. Cigarette smoking and high body mass index were associated with esophageal hypermotility. Assessment of the dysphagia symptom scores may help identify patients with EMDs.