Biosimilars/Research
Four steps for streamlining biosimilars development
The cost of developing biosimilars can be prohibitively expensive. A manuscript published in GaBI Journal entitled 'Biosimilars drug development: time for a paradigm shift?' [1], explores ways in which we can see leaner and faster biosimilar clinical trials, without compromise on safety and efficacy of the drug products.
Biosimilars: US prescriber’s attitudes and perceptions revealed
A report based on the 2021 survey carried out by the Alliance for Safe Biologic Medicines (ASBM) reveals the views of prescribing physicians, regarding the prescribing, substitution and interchangeability of biosimilars [1].
Clinical trial advances for Kashiv and Celltrion
US-based Kashiv Biosciences announced that ADL018, a biosimilar candidate to Xolair (omalizumab), has completed a successful global phase I clinical study in healthy volunteers. In addition, South Korea’s Celltrion announced that it received approval from the US Food and Drug Administration for the phase III investigational new drug (IND) application of its biosimilar CT-P53 for Ocrevus (ocrelizumab), a treatment for multiple sclerosis.
Study investigates success of US ‘skinny label’ approval pathway
Recent court rulings have put the US’ ‘skinny label’ approval pathway at risk. Now, a research letter published in JAMA Internal Medicine [1] has found approval and marketing of skinny label biosimilars have led to billions of dollars in savings to Medicare.
Low switch-back for patients treated with Avsola for IBD
A study has reported low switch-back rates for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) switched from the reference infliximab product to Amgen’s biosimilar Avsola (infliximab-axxq), ABP 710 [1].
High mannose glycans in biosimilars and their pharmacokinetic impact
A study conducted by Welch J et al. assessed the measurement, evaluation and potential for high mannose glycans to impact the pharmacokinetic (PK) profile of biosimilar monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), based on data submitted in 21 applications reviewed and approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). They also analysed reproducibility data of the glycan values for a subset of programmes within a reference product class. This reproducibility assessment enabled a broader cross-programme comparison of whether observed differences in high mannose between a proposed biosimilar and its reference product translate into PK differences.
Biosimilars in Southern European Hospital Markets: barriers and determinants of uptake
A recent publication by Barcina Lacosta et al. reflected on the need to understand market dynamics generated following biosimilars availability in Southern Europe, emphasizing that the competitive potential of biosimilars can be further deployed [1]. Considering the country-, setting-, and product-specific nature of biosimilar uptake patterns [2-5], the authors focused the analysis on hospital tumour necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) inhibitor markets in Italy, Portugal and Spain [1].
Regulatory landscape for biosimilars in Latin America
The biosimilar regulatory situation in Latin America varies broadly among the different countries, even though Latin America is moving towards consolidating defined and standardised regulatory pathways for these products. This article gives a summary of the biosimilar regulatory status for the countries represented by members of the panel of experts of the American Health Foundation (AHF). The countries reviewed are Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Guatemala and Peru [1].
Using infliximab economic evaluations in IBD to inform biosimilar access policies
According to a recent review, there has been limited economic evaluation of the varying prices of infliximab, despite its high cost. This limitation hinders the ability to understand the potential effects of introducing biosimilars. To ensure that patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) continue to have access to their current medications, alternative pricing strategies and treatment access should be explored [1].
Biosimilars and other copies of biological products
The Commentary by Kurki P [1] is a response to the article of Klein et al. [2] that deals with copies of original biotherapeutics, biosimilars and non-biosimilars, marketed in 15 low- and middle-income countries (LMIC).
