Anti-CD20 Directed Therapy of B Cell Lymphomas: Are New Agents Really Better?

Curr Oncol Rep. 2018 Nov 27;20(12):103. doi: 10.1007/s11912-018-0748-0.

Abstract

Purpose of review: Since its initial approval in 1997, rituximab has revolutionized the treatment of CD20-positive lymphoproliferative disorders. Now, over two decades later, second-generation molecules are emerging that may have key biological advantages compared to rituximab, as well as biosimilars that may be more cost-effective. Clinicians, health policy makers, and payers will now need to critically appraise the available evidence for these competitors and decide which anti-CD20 to use.

Recent findings: Evidence has emerged directly comparing rituximab IV to a subcutaneous preparation, and head-to-head comparisons of rituximab versus next-generation anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies have also been published. Trials comparing rituximab with newly developed biosimilars have also allowed for registration of these agents. In this review, we will present an overview of anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody development, discuss the mechanistic and clinical evidence for rituximab, as well as the novel compounds, and provide commentary on the possible advantages and limitations of these agents.

Keywords: Biosimilar; CD20; CLL; Immunotherapy; Lymphoma; Monoclonal antibodies; Rituximab.

Publication types

  • Review

MeSH terms

  • Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized / therapeutic use*
  • Antigens, CD20 / immunology*
  • Antineoplastic Agents / therapeutic use*
  • Humans
  • Lymphoma, B-Cell / drug therapy*
  • Lymphoma, B-Cell / immunology*
  • Prognosis

Substances

  • Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized
  • Antigens, CD20
  • Antineoplastic Agents