Biosimilars

FDA new drug approvals up in 2011: 900 biotech drugs in development

FDA had already approved 26 new drugs by the end of August 2011 compared to only 21 approved in 2010. Of note were six cancer drugs and two ground-breaking drugs for hepatitis C. The current year looks likely set a record for recent years for new drug approvals, which may total 35–40 by the end of 2011. After a slow start in the first two months with three new drug approvals and nine rejections in January and February 2011, FDA approved four new drugs, two of which were monoclonal antibodies, in March and five in April. Of the 11 new drugs approved in the first four months, only three biologicals were approved.

US$54 billion worth of biosimilar patents expiring before 2020

By 2020 biological products with sales of around US$23 billion in the EU and US$29 billion in the US are expected to be exposed to biosimilar competition [1].

Boehringer Ingelheim joins other Big Pharma going into biosimilars

Big Pharma is once again taking a major interest in biosimilars. The latest big pharmaceutical player to show an interest is biopharmaceutical specialist Boehringer Ingelheim. The German-based company announced on 26 September 2011 that it would create a dedicated division for the development and commercialisation of biosimilars.

Amphastar’s biosimilar enoxaparin approved by FDA – Momenta launches lawsuit

On 19 September 2011, and after years of conflict with FDA, Amphastar Pharmaceuticals (Amphastar) finally received approval to market a biosimilar version of sanofi-aventis’s blockbuster blood-thinner Lovenox (enoxaparin). The announcement, however, was closely followed by news that Momenta Pharmaceuticals (Momenta) had launched a lawsuit against Amphastar.

EMA biosimilar regulation should include complex biologicals

The EMA’s comprehensive biosimilar regulatory pathway, which includes the need for new clinical trials and comparability studies that demonstrate quality, efficacy, and safety, should be expanded to include complex biologicals, according to innovation researchers at Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands [1].

Generics and biosimilars affected by Obama’s deficit plans

US President Barack Obama’s plan for economic growth and deficit reduction, announced on 19 September 2011, recommends a series of healthcare reforms. The proposals include higher drug rebates for low-income patients, banning pay-to-delay deals between generics and originator companies and reducing biologicals exclusivity from 12 to seven years. The proposals aim to save US$320 billion in healthcare spending over 10 years.

US biosimilars law may prove a barrier to entry for biosimilars

One of the main barriers to biosimilar entry in the US is the US biosimilars law [1]. While some have questioned whether the biosimilars pathway in the US will ever be used [2, 3], others believe that, although flawed, the US biosimilars pathway is likely to become a functioning legal pathway [4].

The biosimilars landscape

There is obviously a market for biosimilars. This is driven by the cost savings to be made by payers and patients alike. By 2015, IMS Health (IMS) expects spending on biosimilars to exceed US$2 billion annually, or about 1% of total global spending on biologicals. They expect new biosimilars to enter the US market by 2014 and European markets to have additional biosimilar molecules introduced during this period [1].

Sanofi announces new long-term objectives

At a ‘strategy and outlook’ seminar for investors held on 6 September 2011, sanofi-aventis (sanofi) CEO Mr Christopher A Viehbacher commented on the group’s outlook. The group has undergone radical changes since 2008, when it was faced with losing several blockbuster drugs over a relatively short time period, the so-called ‘patent cliff’. The main action sanofi took was to buy biotech company Genzyme and thus gain access to the biosimilars, rare diseases and multiple sclerosis markets. However, other actions not so interesting to the media have also played a great part in the company’s repositioning.

EMA comparability studies limiting biosimilar success

The EMA’s comprehensive biosimilar regulatory pathway, which includes the need for new clinical trials and comparability studies that demonstrate quality, efficacy, and safety, is a barrier for the development of clinically superior compounds, according to innovation researchers at Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands [1].

Biosimilars: barriers to entry and profitability in the EU and US

The implications of the US biosimilars law and the pending patent expiries of the 12 major biological products in the EU and the US will have an impact on the profitability and viability of the biosimilars industry [1].

The market for global and European biosimilars

Due to expiring patents for brand name products, cheaper generics are expected to grab market share [1]. This is not surprising due to the list of blockbuster drugs losing their patent protection in 2011 and 2012. These include the world’s best-selling drug, Lipitor (atorvastatin), which in 2010 had almost US$13 billion in worldwide sales, accounting for 15.8% of Pfizer’s total revenue [2].

Hospira looks to biosimilars and increased use of generics for growth

Injectable generics leader, Hospira, announced on 7 September 2011 at its investor day, that it will look to biosimilars and international expansion for future growth.

Five years of bioequivalence data from Cetero questioned

FDA is challenging five years of bioequivalence and other studies conducted at Cetero Research’s Houston facility in the US. This could affect both originator and generics companies alike, putting into question data provided to FDA to support new drug applications (NDAs) and abbreviated new drug applications (ANDAs).

Biosimilars and the pharmaceutical industry

IMS Health predicts a slowing down of the growth in annual spending on medicines, with generics being one of the main contributing factors for this reduction.

Positive results for phase I trial of biosimilar erythropoietin

Hospira, self-proclaimed leader in injectable generics, announced on 6 September 2011 positive results from a phase I clinical trial of its biosimilar erythropoietin (EPO) carried out in the US in patients with anaemia associated with chronic renal (kidney) failure and chemotherapy.

Opportunities for biosimilars in emerging markets

By 2015, IMS Health expects spending on biosimilars to exceed US$2 billion annually, or about 1% of total global spending on biologicals [1]. This growth in biosimilars will be driven mainly by patent expiries coming in the next five years. However, due to the complexity and cost of developing biosimilars for western markets many biosimilar manufacturers are turning to emerging markets as being a much more cost-effective solution.

Biotech growth and biosimilar opportunities in India

The domestic biotechnology industry in India has seen rapid growth during 2010 and India is poised to attain a position of leadership in the biosimilars market according to reports from Ernst & Young India and Frost and Sullivan.

Doctors wary of using biosimilars for extrapolated indications

A report published on 24 August 2011 by research and advisory firm Decision Resources finds that the majority of US and European physicians are wary of using a biosimilar for an indication for which supporting clinical data are lacking.

Stada and Richter to collaborate on biosimilar development

German generics giant Stada Arzneimittel (Stada) and Hungary-based Gedeon Richter (Richter) announced on 30 August 2011 that the two companies have signed licence and collaboration agreements for the development and marketing of two biosimilars.

Controversial nomenclature for new biosimilars

How will FDA chose to name biosimilars? The answer it appears is not simple and could greatly affect the marketing costs associated with these products [1].

FDA and biosimilars: update on key themes

Since the existence of a legal pathway for biosimilars was made possible by the signing of the 2009 Biologics Price Competition and Innovation (BPCI) Act in 2010 by President Barack Obama, FDA has declared itself ‘open for business’ for biosimilars [1]. But what is the thinking of FDA and what should we expect from any guidance on biosimilars?

China’s 5-year biotech investment fires clear warning to US

The Chinese Government has targeted biotechnology as a ‘strategic pillar’ industry, and has pledged to spend 2 trillion yuan (Euros 213. 3 billion; US$308.5 billion) on science and technology in the next five years alone [1]. This has sent out a clear warning to the US Government that China aims to become the world’s pioneer in biotechnology in the short to medium term. In response, despite being under increasing pressure to reduce overall health expenditure, the US Government has resisted calls to cut funding and pledged US$ 32 billion to its National Institutes of Health biomedical research programme for 2012 [2].

Is FDA requesting too much data to allow biosimilars to succeed in the US

The FDA’s recently published plans for a biosimilar approval pathway are facing increasing scrutiny. In an interview with Scientific American, Novel Health Strategies’ biosimilar market entry advisor, Dr Saurabh Aggarwal, said that the level of data required by FDA is too much for biosimilars to be able to succeed [1].

FDA and biosimilars: process update

Despite the fact that a legal pathway for the approval of biosimilars in the US has existed for more than a year, formal guidance has still not been issued by FDA. This has led many to question when, or even if, biosimilars will come onto the market in the US [1]. So what has FDA been doing in the meantime and how close are we to seeing some biosimilar guidance in the US?

FDA gives some insight into biosimilar pathway

FDA has outlined some of the requirements it intends to include in its biosimilars approval process in an article published in the New England Journal of Medicine [1]. The article is intended to give drugmakers, investors and other interested parties more insight into the approval process for biosimilars.

EMA proposes more precise definition for biosimilars

Members of the Biosimilar Medicinal Products Working Party at the EMA expressed the need to propose a more precise definition for biosimilars due to problems arising from imprecise usage of the term biosimilar in the literature [1].

A biosimilar by any other name …

Following the expiration of patents on the originator molecules, copied products have been introduced into the market. EU regulators have named these products as ‘biosimilars’, that is ‘similar biological medicinal products’; and US regulators refer to them as ‘follow-on biologics’. Specific regulatory pathways have also been established for these biosimilar products, which differ from those for ‘chemical generics’ [1].

Observations on the introduction of biosimilar epoetins into Europe

Professor Wolfgang Jelkmann of the University of Luebeck in Germany has recently published a review article summarising the experiences with biosimilars introduced in the EU after the original biopharmaceutical patents expired [1].

Timing of the launch of biosimilars in Europe

When and where to launch a new biosimilar to ensure that its uptake is the most effective throughout Europe is an issue that affects all pharmaceutical companies working on biosimilars [1].

How cheap will biosimilars need to be

What level of discounts will biosimilars need to provide to be competitive? Some believe that biosimilars will need to provide substantial discounts, being priced as low as 25%, and not 75%, of the originator price [1].

The market for biosimilars

How do the different markets respond to biosimilars? Markets with strong generic adoption frameworks are likely to have good biosimilar adoption as well. However, physician willingness to adopt may be a barrier to entry [1].

Biosimilar regulatory issues

In Europe, the regulatory frameworks for biosimilars are largely established, with both general guidelines and product specific guidelines put in place by the EMA, covering human insulin, somatropin, human growth hormone, erythropoietin, interferon-alpha, low molecular weight heparin and monoclonal antibody. The agency is also currently working on draft guidelines for a number of other product class specific guidelines, including interferon-beta and follicle stimulation hormone.

Biosimilars approved in Europe

Last update: 22 April 2025

In the European Union (EU), a legal framework for approving biosimilars was established in 2003. This framework means that biosimilars can only be approved centrally via the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and not nationally.

Development of biosimilars

Costs and risk reduction are facilitating product development of biosimilars [1].

EMA and FDA to collaborate on biosimilars

The EMA announced on 23 June 2011 that it had set up a new ‘cluster’ to collaborate with the FDA for the exchange of information on biosimilar drugs.

Current status of biosimilar development

Widespread therapeutic use of biological pharmaceutical products appears to be inevitable. Nevertheless, the law governing approval of biosimilar products in the US is still not in place. The size of the biologicals market and impending patent expiries, however, are making approval of a practical pathway for biosimilars more urgent.

Manufacturing of biosimilars

Manufacturing of biosimilars is more challenging than the traditional small molecule generics. Some of the reasons are:

• Investments (including operating costs) associated with manufacturing of biosimilars along with the risk of failure for biosimilars are significantly higher than that for small molecule generics. This results in a relatively smaller discount for biosimilars compared to small molecule generics.
• Minor changes in manufacturing process can cause significant changes in efficacy or immunogenicity.
• Biosimilars are larger and more complex molecules to manufacture.

Partnerships will drive biosimilar development

With biosimilars tipped to become a multibillion-dollar market in the coming years, everybody is jumping on the biosimilars bandwagon, and it seems it’s not just limited to pharmaceutical companies.

Does industry support biosimilar user fees in the US?

According to FDA, biopharmaceutical trade groups are supportive of its proposal for biosimilar user fees, with sponsors paying an up-front fee with their applications.