Up­dat­ed: In­ter­change­able biosim­i­lars: FDA fi­nal­izes guid­ance

The FDA on Fri­day fi­nal­ized a long-await­ed guid­ance spelling out how biosim­i­lars can achieve an in­ter­change­able sta­tus, which means they may be sub­sti­tut­ed for the ref­er­ence bi­o­log­ic with­out a pre­scriber in­ter­ven­ing.

No in­ter­change­able biosim­i­lars have been ap­proved in the US yet, and the num­ber of com­pa­nies seek­ing ap­proval for an in­ter­change­able has re­mained at just one, with Boehringer In­gel­heim pub­licly dis­clos­ing that it’s be­gun an in­ter­change­abil­i­ty study for its adal­i­mum­ab (Hu­mi­ra) biosim­i­lar.

But for­mer FDA Com­mis­sion­er Scott Got­tlieb said last month that in­ter­change­able in­sulin prod­ucts are like­ly com­ing to the US in the next cou­ple of years. And fi­nal in­ter­change­abil­i­ty guid­ance will pro­vide spon­sors with more cer­tain­ty on how to de­vel­op in­ter­change­able prod­ucts.

Changes in Fi­nal Guid­ance

The fi­nal guid­ance is sev­en pages short­er than the draft and does not in­clude two ap­pen­dices that were in­clud­ed in the draft on com­par­a­tive use hu­man fac­tors stud­ies.

Com­menters on the draft took is­sue with terms that need­ed fur­ther clar­i­ty, such as “resid­ual un­cer­tain­ty” and “fin­ger­print-like,” which is used in the draft to de­scribe the sim­i­lar­i­ty be­tween the pro­posed in­ter­change­able prod­uct and the ref­er­ence prod­uct.

The fi­nal guid­ance, how­ev­er, no longer us­es the term “fin­ger­print-like” and where­as the draft in­cludes al­most 20 ref­er­ences to “resid­ual un­cer­tain­ty,” the fi­nal guid­ance in­cludes on­ly one. “The agency al­so con­sid­ered the nu­mer­ous com­ments on the draft in­ter­change­abil­i­ty guid­ance and made changes to pro­vide in­creased clar­i­ty to stake­hold­ers,” Act­ing Com­mis­sion­er Ned Sharp­less said.

Chris­tine Sim­mon

Chris­tine Sim­mon, ex­ec­u­tive di­rec­tor of the Biosim­i­lars Coun­cil, ap­plaud­ed the FDA’s “time­ly guid­ance on in­ter­change­abil­i­ty for biosim­i­lars, par­tic­u­lar­ly its stream­lined da­ta and study de­sign re­quire­ments that al­low flex­i­bil­i­ty and the use of glob­al com­para­tor prod­ucts to sup­port ap­pli­ca­tions.”

Com­pa­nies com­ment­ing on the draft al­so took is­sue with the re­quire­ment that they must use US-li­censed ref­er­ence prod­uct in a switch­ing study (or stud­ies). And the FDA has al­tered this re­quire­ment in the fi­nal guid­ance and re­named that sec­tion of the guid­ance.

“If a spon­sor seeks to use da­ta de­rived from a switch­ing study or stud­ies com­par­ing a pro­posed in­ter­change­able prod­uct with a non-U.S.-li­censed com­para­tor prod­uct as part of the demon­stra­tion that the pro­posed in­ter­change­able prod­uct meets the stan­dard de­scribed in sec­tion 351(k)(4)(B) of the PHS Act, the spon­sor should pro­vide ad­e­quate da­ta and in­for­ma­tion to es­tab­lish a ‘bridge’ be­tween the non-U.S.-li­censed com­para­tor and the U.S.-li­censed ref­er­ence prod­uct and there­by jus­ti­fy the rel­e­vance of the da­ta ob­tained us­ing the non-U.S.-li­censed com­para­tor to an eval­u­a­tion of whether the re­quire­ments of sec­tion 351(k)(4)(B) have been met,” the fi­nal guid­ance says, ex­plain­ing more about what the bridge would en­tail.

Oth­er­wise, most of the draft ver­sion was car­ried over in­to the fi­nal guid­ance, in­clud­ing the re­quire­ment that com­pa­nies use so-called “switch­ing stud­ies” to de­ter­mine whether al­ter­nat­ing be­tween a biosim­i­lar and its ref­er­ence prod­uct im­pacts the safe­ty or ef­fi­ca­cy of the treat­ment.

Bern­stein biotech an­a­lyst Ron­ny Gal added in a note to in­vestors: “The main added re­quire­ment is a 2-arm switch­ing tri­al where all pa­tients start on the ref­er­ence prod­uct. In one arm, the pa­tients will re­main on the ref­er­ence prod­uct through­out. On the oth­er, they will switch back and forth twice, end­ing on the biosim­i­lar prod­uct. Crit­i­cal­ly, the main com­par­i­son is on PK/PD mark­ers, not ef­fi­ca­cy mark­ers (which FDA con­sid­ers less sen­si­tive). This will ma­te­ri­al­ly low­er costs of do­ing these tri­als.”

He al­so said he ex­pects this guid­ance will en­able in­sulin in­ter­change­ables and al­low for in­ter­change­able ver­sions of “some of the eas­i­er an­ti­bod­ies to repli­cate like Eylea.”

Con­sid­er­a­tions in Demon­strat­ing In­ter­change­abil­i­ty With a Ref­er­ence Prod­uct: Guid­ance for In­dus­try

Ed­i­tor’s Note: Up­dat­ed with com­ment from Bern­stein’s Gal.


First pub­lished in Reg­u­la­to­ry Fo­cus™ by the Reg­u­la­to­ry Af­fairs Pro­fes­sion­als So­ci­ety, the largest glob­al or­ga­ni­za­tion of and for those in­volved with the reg­u­la­tion of health­care prod­ucts. Click here for more in­for­ma­tion.

Author

Zachary Brennan

managing editor, RAPS

It’s fi­nal­ly over: Bio­gen, Ei­sai scrap big Alzheimer’s PhI­I­Is af­ter a pre­dictable BACE cat­a­stro­phe rais­es safe­ty fears

Months after analysts and investors called on Biogen and Eisai to scrap their BACE drug for Alzheimer’s and move on in the wake of a string of late-stage failures and rising safety fears, the partners have called it quits. And they said they were dropping the drug — elenbecestat — after the independent monitoring board raised concerns about…safety.

We don’t know exactly what researchers found in this latest catastrophe, but the companies noted in their release that investigators had determined that the drug was flunking the risk/benefit analysis.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 59,700+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Lisa M. DeAngelis, MSKCC

MSK picks brain can­cer ex­pert Lisa DeAn­ge­lis as its next CMO — fol­low­ing José Basel­ga’s con­tro­ver­sial ex­it

It’s official. Memorial Sloan Kettering has picked a brain cancer expert as its new physician-in-chief and CMO, replacing José Baselga, who left under a cloud after being singled out by The New York Times and ProPublica for failing to properly air his lucrative industry ties.

His replacement, who now will be in charge of MSK’s cutting-edge research work as well as the cancer care delivered by hundreds of practitioners, is Lisa M. DeAngelis. DeAngelis had been chair of the neurology department and co-founder of MSK’s brain tumor center and was moved in to the acting CMO role in the wake of Baselga’s departure.

Penn team adapts CAR-T tech, reengi­neer­ing mouse cells to treat car­diac fi­bro­sis

After establishing itself as one of the pioneer research centers in the world for CAR-T cancer therapies, creating new attack vehicles to eradicate cancer cells, a team at Penn Medicine has begun the tricky transition of using the basic technology for heart repair work.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 59,700+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Tal Zaks. Moderna

The mR­NA uni­corn Mod­er­na has more ear­ly-stage hu­man da­ta it wants to show off — reach­ing new peaks in prov­ing the po­ten­tial

The whole messenger RNA field has attracted billions of dollars in public and private investor cash gambled on the prospect of getting in on the ground floor. And this morning Boston-based Moderna, one of the leaders in the field, wants to show off a few more of the cards it has to play to prove to you that they’re really in the game.

The whole hand, of course, has yet to be dealt. And there’s no telling who gets to walk with a share of the pot. But any cards on display at this point — especially after being accused of keeping its deck under lock and key — will attract plenty of attention from some very wary, and wired, observers.

“In terms of the complexity and unmet need,” says Tal Zaks, the chief medical officer, “this is peak for what we’ve accomplished.”

Moderna has two Phase I studies it wants to talk about now.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 59,700+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

It's not per­fect, but it's a good start: FDA pan­elists large­ly en­dorse Aim­mune's peanut al­ler­gy ther­a­py

Two days after a fairly benign review from FDA staff, an independent panel of experts largely endorsed the efficacy and safety of Aimmune’s peanut allergy therapy, laying the groundwork for approval with a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy (REMS).

Traditionally, peanut allergies are managed by avoidance, but the threat of accidental exposure cannot be nullified. Some allergists have devised a way to dose patients off-label with peanut protein derived from supermarket products to wean them off their allergies. But the idea behind Aimmune’s product was to standardize the peanut protein, and track the process of desensitization — so when accidental exposure in the real world invariably occurs, patients are less likely to experience a life-threatening allergic reaction.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 59,700+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Rit­ter bombs fi­nal PhI­II for sole lac­tose in­tol­er­ance drug — shares plum­met

More than two years ago Ritter Pharmaceuticals managed to find enough silver lining in its Phase IIb/III study — after missing the top-line mark — to propel its lactose intolerance toward a confirmatory trial. But as it turned out, the enthusiasm only set the biotech and its investors up to be sorely disappointed.

This time around there’s little left to salvage. Not only did RP-G28 fail to beat placebo in reducing lactose intolerance symptoms, patients in the treatment group actually averaged a smaller improvement. On a composite score measuring symptoms like abdominal pain, cramping, bloating and gas, patients given the drug had a mean reduction of 3.159 while the placebo cohort saw a 3.420 drop on average (one-sided p-value = 0.0106).

Ear­ly snap­shot of Ad­verum's eye gene ther­a­py sparks con­cern about vi­sion loss

An early-stage update on Adverum Biotechnologies’ intravitreal gene therapy has triggered investor concern, after patients with wet age-related macular degeneration (AMD) saw their vision deteriorate, despite signs that the treatment is improving retinal anatomy.

Adverum, on Wednesday, unveiled 24-week data from the OPTIC trial of its experimental therapy, ADVM-022, in six patients who have been administered with one dose of the therapy. On average, patients in the trial had severe disease with an average of 6.2 anti-VEGF injections in the eight months prior to screening and an average annualized injection frequency of 9.3 injections.

Alex Ar­faei trades his an­a­lyst's post for a new role as biotech VC; Sanofi vet heads to Vi­for

Too often, Alex Arfaei arrived too late. 

An analyst at BMO Capital Markets, he’d meet with biotech or pharmaceutical heads for their IPO or secondary funding and his brain, trained on a biology degree and six years at Merck and Endo, would spring with questions: Why this biomarker? Why this design? Why not this endpoint? Not that he could do anything about it. These execs were coming for clinical money; their decisions had been made and finalized long ago.

Arde­lyx bags its first FDA OK for IBS, set­ting up a show­down with Al­ler­gan, Iron­wood

In the first of what it hopes will be a couple of major regulatory milestones for its new drug, Ardelyx has bagged an FDA approval to market Ibsrela (tenapanor) for irritable bowel syndrome.

The drug’s first application will be for IBS with constipation (IBS-C), inhibiting sodium-hydrogen exchanger NHE3 in the GI tract in such a way as to increase bowel movements and decrease abdominal pain. This comes on the heels of two successful Phase III trials.