Trial reportTargeted oncology2020
Efficacy and Safety of ABP 798: Results from the JASMINE Trial in Patients with Follicular Lymphoma in Comparison with Rituximab Reference Product.
Trial report in Targeted oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT02747043 (A Randomized, Double-Blind Study Evaluating the Efficacy, Safety and Immunogenicity of ABP 798 Compared With Rituximab in Subjects With CD20 Positive B-Cell Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
A Randomized, Double-Blind Study Evaluating the Efficacy, Safety and Immunogenicity of ABP 798 Compared With Rituximab in Subjects With CD20 Positive B-Cell Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma (NHL)
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical Similarity of Biosimilars and Reference Drugs: A Comprehensive Review and New Hope for Public Health in a New Frontier.Current drug research reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Biosimilar monoclonal antibodies for cancer treatment in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Clinical Benefit, Price, and Uptake for Cancer Biosimilars vs Reference Drugs in China: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.JAMA network open · 2023Pooled it
- Comparative Safety Profiles of Oncology Biosimilars: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.BioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy · 2023Pooled it
- Characteristics of Clinical Trials Evaluating Biosimilars in the Treatment of Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.JAMA oncology · 2022Pooled it
- Evidence for the use of anti-CD20 therapeutic antibodies in immune thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura management: a review.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Review
- Article
- Efficacy and safety of rituximab biosimilar (DRL_RI) versus MabTheraTherapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2025Article
- Monoclonal antibody biosimilars for cancer treatment.iScience · 2024Review
- A Developer's Perspective on Clinical Evidence and Benefits for Rituximab Biosimilar Uptake, with a Focus on CT-P10.Clinical drug investigation · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
10 authors at 8 institutions in 9 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionABP 798 is being developed as a biosimilar to rituximab reference product (RP), a CD20-directed cytolytic antibody that is approved in the US and EU for the treatment of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL).
methodsThis randomized, double-blind, comparative clinical study (JASMINE) evaluated the efficacy and safety of ABP 798 compared with rituximab RP. Adult, anti-CD20 treatment naïve patients diagnosed with grade 1, 2, or 3a follicular B-cell NHL expressing CD20 were randomized 1:1 to receive a 375 mg/m
resultsOf the 256 randomized patients, 254 were treated with ABP 798 (n = 128; 100%) or rituximab RP (n = 126; 98.4%); 96 (78.0%) patients in the ABP 798 group and 87 (70.2%) in the rituximab RP group had a best ORR by week 28. The point estimate of RD in ORR between ABP 798 and rituximab RP from the adjusted generalized linear model for stratification factors was 7.7%. Clinical equivalence was based on sequential testing of the one-sided 95% lower confidence limits and one-sided 95% upper confidence limits of RD in ORR (- 1.4% and 16.8%, respectively) which was within the prespecified non-inferiority margin (- 15%) and non-superiority margin (35.5%), respectively. Results of sensitivity analyses were consistent with the primary efficacy analysis. ABP 798 was also comparable to rituximab RP across additional secondary endpoints, further supporting the conclusion of similarity, and including: RD of ORR at week 12; trough serum concentrations; percent of patients with complete depletion of CD19+ cell count at day 8; safety; and immunogenicity.
conclusionsThese results support a conclusion of similar clinical efficacy between ABP 798 and rituximab RP in patients with follicular lymphoma. NCT NUMBER: NCT02747043; first posted April 21, 2016. EUDRACT NUMBER: 2013-005,542-11; submitted 14 October, 2014.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.