Skip to main content
. 2022 Aug 21;10(8):2045. doi: 10.3390/biomedicines10082045

Table 5.

Summary of clinical trials evaluating the safety and efficacy of approved trastuzumab biosimilars in patients with HER2+ breast cancer.

Ref. Chemotherapy Regimens Cohort Size Phase Settings Endpoints
%Ctrough,
μg/mL
%ORR %EFS PFS,
%HR
OS,
%HR
%bpCR DFS,
%HR
TTD, mo AEs/SAEs
[24]
Pivot et al.,
2018
Neoadjuvant phase (8 cycles): SB3 (n = 402)
vs.
TRZ
(n = 398) plus chemotherapy (docetaxel -> FEC)
Adjuvant phase (10 cycles) of SB3 or TRZ as monotherapy
800 III Patients with HER2+ early breast cancer in the neoadjuvant setting 96.3%
vs.
91.2%
51.7%
vs.
42.0%
45.8% vs. 35.8 % 96.6% (SB3) vs. 95.2% (TRZ) of patients experienced one or more AEs
SAEs: 10.5% (SB3 group) vs. 10.7% (TRZ group)
0.7% and 0.0% had antidrug antibodies (up to cycle 9) with SB3 and TRZ, respectively
[25] Pivot et al.,
2019
SB3 (n = 186)
vs.
TRZ (n = 181)
367 III (follow-up) Patients who completed the phase 3 study (at 3 years): 91.9% with SB3 and 85.2% with TRZ Total AEs: 9.1% with SB3 and 17.1% with TRZ
Incidence of asymptomatic significant LVEF decrease was rare (SB3, n = 1; TRZ, n = 2)
No cases of symptomatic CHF or other cardiac events were reported
[27] Stebbing et al.,
2017
Neoadjuvant CT-P6 (n = 271)
vs.
TRZ (n = 278) plus docetaxel
(Cycles 1–4)
->FEC (cycles 5–8)
549 III Women ≥ 18 yrs with stage I–IIIa operable HER2+ breast cancer 46.8% vs. 50.4% Serious TEAEs:
7% in CT-P6 group vs. 8% in TRZ group (febrile neutropenia)
Grade 3 or worse TEAES:
6% in the CT-P6 group vs. 8% of 278 in the TRZ group
[31] Esteva et al., 2019 CT-P6 (n = 271) vs. TRZ (n = 278) 549 III (post hoc analysis) Female aged over 18 yrs with pathologically confirmed, newly diagnosed, operable HER2+ Breast cancer Comparable between the two groups regardless of age, region, or clinical disease stage Similar results with bpCR Drug-related TEAEs: 47.6% (CT-P6) vs. 52.2% (TRZ)
[32]
Stebbing et al., 2021
CT-P6 (n=259)
vs.
TRZ
(n=269)
III
(follow-up)
528 Post-treatment follow-up from Phase III equivalent study 1.31 (95% CI: 0.86–2.01) 1.10 (95% CI: 0.57–2.13) 1.23 (95% CI:
0.78–1.93)
Study drug-related cardiac disorders (CT-P6: 8.1% vs. TRZ: 8.6%)
Immunogenicity was similar between groups
[43]
von Minckwitz et al., 2018
Anthracycline-based chemotherapy->
ABP 980 (n = 364) or TRZ (n = 361)
III 725 Women ≥ 18 yrs with histologically confirmed HER2+ invasive early breast cancer, ECOG (0 or 1) in the neoadjuvant setting 48% vs. 41% Neoadjuvant phase: Grade 3 or worse AEs: 15% vs. 14% (neoadjuvant phase), 9% and 6%
(adjuvant phase) in the ABP 980 and TRZ group, respectively
Neutropenia: 21 (6%) patients in both groups
[47]
Li et al., 2022
PF-05280014
(n = 352) vs.
TRZ (n = 355)
plus paclitaxel
III 707 Women ≥ 18 yrs with metastatic, histologically confirmed HER2+ breast cancer (ECOG status: 0–2) 92.9% (95% CI:
0.656–1.316)
12.25 vs. 12.06 Incidences of TEAEs overall (98.6%; 96.6%) and for grades ≥3:
41.0%; 43.1%) in PF-05280014 and TRZ group, respectively
[48] Lammers et al., 2018 PF-05280014
(n = 114)
vs. TRZ (n = 112)
III 226 Women older than 18 yrs with histologically confirmed HER2+ breast cancer 92.1% vs. 93.3% 47.0% vs. 50.0% Grade 3–4 TEAEs: 38.1% vs. 45.5%, Antidrug antibody rates: 0% vs. 0.89%
[49]
Rugo et al., 2021
Trastuzumab dkst (n = 230) vs. TRZ (n = 228)
plus taxane
-> continued monotherapy until disease progression
III 458 (ITT population)
343 (monotherapy/safety population
Patients with HER2+ mBC 35.7% vs. 37.7% 52.6% vs. 50.0% Cumulative TEAEs and SAEs were similar in both groups, with few grade ≥ 3 TEAEs (69.3% vs. 72.6%),
Immunogenicity was low and similar in both groups at 48 weeks

TRZ: trastuzumab, EFS: Event-Free Survival, PFS: Progression-Free Survival, DFS: Disease-Free Survival, TTD: Time to Treatment Discontinuation, bpCR: Breast Pathological Complete Response, FEC: Fluorouracil, Epirubicin, Cyclophosphamide, mBC: Metastatic Breast Cancer.