Head-to-head evidence
Cemiplimab vs Serplulimab
Same mechanism, same race: design-graded trial evidence for both assets, with the grading rationale shown. Grades describe the quality of the evidence, never the merits of either security.
Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
Shared mechanism: PD-1 · full Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer pipeline
Cemiplimab
Marketed by Regeneron Pharmaceuticals and partners
NCT03088540 · Phase 3 · completed
This was a large, randomized, actively-controlled trial with two hard clinical endpoints, survival and progression-free survival, both of which showed a statistically significant benefit for cemiplimab (median overall survival 23.4 vs 13.7 months; progression-free survival assessed by an independent, blinded reviewer). However, patients and treating doctors knew which treatment was being given, since the study was not blinded, which is a real limitation despite the otherwise strong design and the clear-cut result.
Next expected readout: December 2026 · NCT06623656 (registry estimate)
Serplulimab
Developed by Shanghai Henlius Biotech
NCT05807893 · Phase 2/3 · completed
The study treated 40 participants in a non-randomized, open-label, single-arm design without a comparator group. Its primary endpoint was intracranial progression-free survival. Registry results were not posted at the time of grading; the key result shown was recovered from the cited external source.
Next expected readout: October 2026 · NCT06848699 (registry estimate)
The full competitive landscape for each asset (every same-race competitor with aligned evidence, sortable) is on the asset pages: Cemiplimab's landscape · Serplulimab's landscape