Biosimilars/Research

Biotech pipeline and biosimilars

There are more than 200 new biotechnology products in the pipeline (phase II to registered), all of which could be future targets for biosimilars. However, around 60% of these products concern mechanisms of action that are already available, see Figure 1 [1].

Biosimilars or biobetters–what does the future hold

Biosuperiors or biobetters are improvements to originator biological molecules, whereas biosimilars are structural imitations of the originator. But how will the pharma industry choose to pursue this lucrative market and benefit from patent expirations on biologicals? Will biobetters or biosimilars be the winners?

How profitable will biosimilars be

The profitability of biosimilars remains an open question. Five years after launch it is thought that most biosimilars markets will look similar to generics markets (70% penetration, 25% of brand-name drug price) but also that a ‘brand-like’ market with lower price attrition and market share is possible [1].

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].

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].

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].

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].

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].

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].

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.

Development of biosimilars

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

Standards for biosimilars or ‘alternative’ biologicals in India

In the highly regulated market of the EU clear and rigorous guidelines exist for approval of biosimilars. In the EU biosimilars must ensure the same quality, safety and efficacy, as any other product, along with demonstrating biosimilarity (comparability) with the reference product.

Immunogenicity of biosimilar low molecular weight heparins

In a presentation by Professor JM Walenga and colleagues from the Loyola University Medical Center, Illinois,USA, 'immunogenicity issues faced by biosimilar low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs)' were discussed [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].

Challenges ahead for biosimilar development

Biosimilars, it seems are here to stay, but there is still some way to go before they become commonplace. There is also concern over the associated costs for biological medicines. The cost of biotech therapies is expected to steadily grow by about 30% (an approximately 20 fold increase in 10 years) by 2016.

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].

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.

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.

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.

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.

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].

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].

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].

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].

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].

US approvals of biologicals doubled in last decade

Regulatory approvals for new biological drugs in the US have nearly doubled in the last decade compared with the 1990s, according to the May/June 2011 issue of the Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development (CSDD) Impact Report. However, the author of the report, Research Assistant Professor Janice Reichert, said there are still ‘substantial challenges’ to be faced by biologicals manufacturers if they wish to ‘maintain that pace’.

Need for a global pathway for biosimilars

The need for access to biosimilars is global, yet the regulations are national. Issues with this approach are discussed by Dr Mark McCamish and Dr Gillian Woollett in their published paper [1].

Worldwide biosimilar development

The limited access to high-quality biologicals due to the cost of treatment constitutes an unmet medical need in the US and other regions of the world [1].

Opportunities for biosimilar development

Rising drug costs and limited healthcare budgets across the world, coupled with the fact that many biotechnology drugs will soon lose their patent protection, means that there is a huge opportunity for biosimilar manufacturers.

Comparability for biosimilar development

How does ‘comparability’ apply to biosimilar drug development? This was the question discussed by Dr Mark McCamish and Dr Gillian Woollett [1].

Regulatory approach to biosimilar development

Legislation in Europe in 2004 created a legal pathway for approval of biosimilars and the first biosimilar, Omnitrope (somatropin) as approved by the EMA in 2006. The US is lagging behind somewhat, having only just approved a legal pathway in March 2010 and with practical guidance from the FDA still anticipated.

Interchangeability or substitution of biosimilars

The interchangeability or substitution of biosimilars is a subject that differs somewhat between Europe and the US. These different approaches to biosimilars are discussed by Dr Mark McCamish and Dr Gillian Woollett in their published paper [1].

Changes in the quality attributes of darbepoetin alfa

Quality changes over a period of time were found in commercially available darbepoetin alfa (Aranesp) by Sandoz researchers. Since the drug remained on the market with an unchanged label, this would indicate that the changes were accepted by the health authorities [1].

Acceptable changes in quality for glycosylated biologicals

Research carried out by Sandoz into three glycosylated protein biotechnology drugs currently on the market showed quality changes over the period studied. Since all three drugs remained on the market with unchanged labels, this would indicate that the changes were accepted by the health authorities [1].

Etanercept and quality attributes changes

Quality changes in commercially available etanercept (Enbrel) were found by Sandoz researchers over a period of time. Since the drug remained on the market with an unchanged label, this would indicate that the changes were accepted by the health authorities [1].

Comparison of US and European biosimilar regulatory pathways

The EU and the US have some differences in the way they approach biosimilars. Some of these differences were outlined in an article by Mr David Rosen and Mr Larry Lian published on 2 March 2011.

Pharmacodynamic response of biosimilar filgrastim

Research published online on 10 March 2011 on the pharmacodynamic response of recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) filgrastim has shown that there is no difference between biosimilar and originator G-CSF.

Biosimilar low molecular weight heparins in Brazil

In Brazil, the registration of new drugs is carried out only when the regulatory agency (Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária, Anvisa) is fully satisfied with their quality, efficacy and safety. Likewise for biosimilars it is necessary that the biosimilar be equally effective and safe and without contaminants in relation to the originator medicine.

Ongoing monitoring of biosimilar G-CSF (filgrastim)

Sandoz is carrying out ongoing studies to ensure the safety of its biosimilar recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (filgrastim G-CSF). The MONITOR-GCSF study will recruit at least 1,000 patients from a minimum of 75 centres and follow them for a maximum of six cycles of chemotherapy.

Biosimilar substitution in the EU

Although many things—including regulations for licensing of biosimilars—are harmonised within the EU, the attitude towards biosimilars and their substitution within the different countries of the EU varies widely.