A consensus has emerged that approval of biosimilars requires both biological and clinical evidence. The ‘comparability exercise’ requires consideration of a wide range of aspects, including analytical and physico-chemical characterisation by several methods, comparative biological assays, comparative immunogenicity assessment, among others. The use of different host cells for the biosimilar product and the comparator in principle is possible.
Approval of biosimilar epoetins: how similar are they?
Biosimilars/Research | Posted 24/09/2010 0 Post your comment
Although required, a clinical programme for a biosimilar should have the primary aim of establishing ‘similarity’ and thus might be abridged compared with full clinical development of a new drug. The extent of studies required depends on the complexity of the product, its mode of action, its toxicity, the possible clinical effect of immunogenicity and the comparability of the response in different populations. See Table 1.
Table 1: Biosimilar erythropoietins approved in the EU in 2007
The high standards manufacturers of follow-up biologics have to meet require extensive investment in product testing, production and marketing. Consequently, the cost of protein drugs will continue to be relatively high.
Related article
Biosimilar epoetins: how similar are they?
Reference
Schellekens H. Biosimilar epoetins: how similar are they? Eur J Hosp Pharm. 2004;10(3):243-7.
News
EMA recommends approval for tocilizumab biosimilar Avtozma and filgrastim biosimilar Zefylti
Ustekinumab biosimilars Yesintek, Steqeyma, and Otulfi approved by FDA, EMA and Health Canada
General
Biologicals and biosimilars available for IBD in Canada
Biosimilar medicines on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme in Australia
Comments (0)
Post your comment