Trial reportBioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy2022
Candidate Bevacizumab Biosimilar CT-P16 versus European Union Reference Bevacizumab in Patients with Metastatic or Recurrent Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report in BioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03676192 (A Double-Blind, Randomized, Active-Controlled, Parallel-Group, Phase 3 Study to Compare Efficacy and Safety of CT-P16 and EU-Approved Avastin as First-Line Treatment for Metastatic or Recurrent Non-Squamous Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 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 Double-Blind, Randomized, Active-Controlled, Parallel-Group, Phase 3 Study to Compare Efficacy and Safety of CT-P16 and EU-Approved Avastin as First-Line Treatment for Metastatic or Recurrent Non-Squamous Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- 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
- Population Pharmacokinetic Comparability of CT-P16 Versus EU-AvastinBioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy · 2026Article
- Efficacy and safety of bevacizumab biosimilar SIBP04 compared with bevacizumab (Avastin®) as first-line treatment for locally advanced or metastatic non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer: A randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial.Cancer pathogenesis and therapy · 2025Article
- Survey of Data Package and Sample Size of Comparative Clinical Studies for Biosimilar Developments from PMDA Assessments.Pharmaceutical medicine · 2024Article
- Real-World Clinical Outcomes of Bevacizumab-awwb Biosimilar versus Bevacizumab Reference Product in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.BioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy · 2023Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 7 institutions in 7 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCT-P16 is a candidate bevacizumab biosimilar.
objectiveThis double-blind, multicenter, parallel-group, phase III study aimed to establish equivalent efficacy between CT-P16 and European Union-approved reference bevacizumab (EU-bevacizumab) in patients with metastatic or recurrent non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (nsNSCLC). PATIENTS AND
methodsPatients with stage IV or recurrent nsNSCLC were randomized (1:1) to receive CT-P16 or EU-bevacizumab (15 mg/kg every 3 weeks; ≤ 6 cycles) with paclitaxel (200 mg/m
resultsOverall, 689 patients were randomized (CT-P16, N = 342; EU-bevacizumab, N = 347). ORR was 42.40% (95% confidence interval [CI] 37.16-47.64) and 42.07% (95% CI 36.88-47.27) for CT-P16 and EU-bevacizumab, respectively. The risk difference (0.40 [95% CI - 7.02 to 7.83]) and risk ratio (1.0136 [90% CI 0.8767-1.1719]) for ORR fell within predefined equivalence margins (- 12.5 to + 12.5%, and 0.7368 to 1.3572, respectively), demonstrating equivalence between CT-P16 and EU-bevacizumab. Median response duration, time to progression, progression-free survival, and overall survival were comparable between treatment groups. Safety profiles were similar: 96.2% (CT-P16) and 93.0% (EU-bevacizumab) of patients experienced treatment-emergent adverse events. Pharmacokinetics and immunogenicity were comparable between groups.
conclusionsEquivalent efficacy and similar pharmacokinetics, safety, and immunogenicity support bioequivalence of CT-P16 and EU-bevacizumab in patients with nsNSCLC. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03676192.
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.