Photo credit: Jacquelyn Martin

Where are the in­ter­change­able biosim­i­lars?

In June 2017, Leah Christl, for­mer biosim­i­lar lead at FDA, told a con­fer­ence in Chica­go that in­ter­change­able biosim­i­lars were like­ly com­ing to the US mar­ket with­in two years.

And al­though no in­ter­change­able biosim­i­lar has been ap­proved by FDA yet, and Christl has since moved on to Am­gen, progress on in­ter­change­able biosim­i­lars has been slow in the in­ter­ven­ing years.

Most re­cent­ly, Boehringer In­gel­heim an­nounced that it has com­plet­ed, as of last April, a switch­ing study nec­es­sary for launch­ing an in­ter­change­able biosim­i­lar for Hu­mi­ra (adal­i­mum­ab), al­though the com­pa­ny did not of­fer any fur­ther de­tails on the tim­ing of its sub­mis­sion to FDA or whether there will be an ad­vi­so­ry com­mit­tee to re­view the da­ta. Boehringer al­ready has an adal­i­mum­ab biosim­i­lar ap­proved by FDA, which it will launch in the US on 1 Ju­ly 2023.

In ad­di­tion, next March, in­sulin prod­ucts will make the tran­si­tion from be­ing reg­u­lat­ed un­der the FD&C Act to the PHS Act, which, ac­cord­ing to for­mer FDA Com­mis­sion­er Scott Got­tlieb means in­ter­change­able in­sulin prod­ucts are like­ly com­ing. FDA held a meet­ing in May on in­ter­change­able in­sulins, which will be par­tic­u­lar­ly im­por­tant as on­ly three fol­low-on in­sulin prod­ucts — Basaglar, Lus­duna and Ad­mel­og — have been ap­proved since 2015.

But out­side of the one po­ten­tial adal­i­mum­ab in­ter­change­able and sev­er­al pos­si­ble in­sulin in­ter­change­able prod­ucts (none of which have been pub­licly dis­closed), no oth­er com­pa­nies have even dis­closed be­gin­ning a switch­ing study. And al­though how such switch­ing stud­ies nec­es­sary for achiev­ing this des­ig­na­tion was on­ly fi­nal­ized last May, with FDA’s guid­ance on biosim­i­lar in­ter­change­abil­i­ty, com­pa­nies have known about the switch­ing study re­quire­ments since at least when the draft was re­leased in Jan­u­ary 2017.

Bern­stein an­a­lyst Ron­ny Gal told Fo­cus via email that Am­gen and San­doz have said they will pur­sue in­ter­change­able biosim­i­lars but switch­ing stud­ies have not list­ed yet.

Got­tlieb al­so said re­cent­ly in an in­ter­view that he be­lieves the use of switch­ing stud­ies to get an in­ter­change­abil­i­ty claim “is fair­ly ef­fi­cient, but I think there’s things that you can con­tin­ue to look at in terms of us­ing re­al-world ev­i­dence [RWE] and look­ing at how you struc­ture those switch­ing stud­ies to po­ten­tial­ly make it more ef­fi­cient.”

An­tho­ny Maf­fia, head of reg­u­la­to­ry af­fairs, North Amer­i­ca at San­doz, told Fo­cus in a phone in­ter­view that he agrees with Got­tlieb on the pos­si­ble use of RWE, “but the way it’s ap­plied needs flush­ing out.”

He al­so said he thinks the in­ter­change­abil­i­ty des­ig­na­tion is “cre­at­ing an ad­di­tion­al bar­ri­er to ac­cess, and we keep em­pha­siz­ing that and feel strong­ly that it’s unique to the US and sets us apart from oth­er glob­al health au­thor­i­ties.”

A lot of the dis­cus­sion on the sav­ings from biosim­i­lars is al­so cen­tered on the fact that state phar­ma­cy laws (45 states and Puer­to Ri­co have passed leg­is­la­tion, ac­cord­ing to Am­gen) stip­u­late that biosim­i­lars may on­ly be sub­sti­tut­ed at the phar­ma­cy if FDA has des­ig­nat­ed them as in­ter­change­able to their ref­er­ence prod­ucts.

“Un­less and un­til we change the way we pay for drugs more broad­ly, in­ter­change­ables are re­al­ly the cen­tral path to re­al com­pe­ti­tion and low­er prices,” Aaron Kessel­heim, di­rec­tor of the Pro­gram on Reg­u­la­tion, Ther­a­peu­tics and Law at Brigham and Women’s Hos­pi­tal, Har­vard Med­ical School, pre­vi­ous­ly ex­plained to Fo­cus.

But many bi­o­log­ics are ad­min­is­tered by physi­cians so the in­ter­change­abil­i­ty des­ig­na­tion will like­ly not be pur­sued in those in­stances. Oth­ers al­so have said in­ter­change­ables will not nec­es­sar­i­ly hit the mar­ket with as large of a dis­count as biosim­i­lars with­out the des­ig­na­tion.

In ad­di­tion, there is a lot of room for mis­in­for­ma­tion among phar­ma­cists and doc­tors. Hil­lel Co­hen, ex­ec­u­tive di­rec­tor of sci­en­tif­ic af­fairs at San­doz, pre­vi­ous­ly ex­plained how an in­ter­change­able biosim­i­lar is not more high­ly sim­i­lar than a non-in­ter­change­able biosim­i­lar, al­though the des­ig­na­tion may pro­vide the false per­cep­tion of a bet­ter prod­uct.

Maf­fia added that he thinks FDA “ab­solute­ly” must clar­i­fy when cer­tain com­pa­nies are spread­ing mis­in­for­ma­tion on biosim­i­lars. “We have to get to a com­mon set of lan­guage and that’s some­thing that FDA has a role in,” he said.


RAPS: 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

Com­mu­ni­cat­ing the val­ue of pre­ci­sion med­i­cine

By Natasha Cowan, Content Marketing Manager at Blue Latitude Health.
Many stakeholders are confused by novel precision medicines, including patients and healthcare professionals. So, how can industry help them to navigate this complexity?

Precision medicine represents a new paradigm in healthcare. It embodies the shift from treating many patients with the same therapy, to having the tools to identify the best treatment for every patient.

Spe­cial re­port: Twen­ty ex­tra­or­di­nary women in bio­phar­ma R&D who worked their way to the top

What differentiates a woman leader in biopharma R&D from a man?

Not much, except there are fewer of them in senior posts. Data suggest women are not more risk-averse, family-oriented or less confident than their male counterparts — indeed the differences between the two sexes are negligible. But a glance at the top R&D positions in Big Pharma leaves little doubt that upward migration in the executive ranks of biopharma R&D is tough.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 65,000+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Ed­i­tas and Cel­gene sub Juno are tack­ling hottest im­munother­a­py cells

As the first CRISPR-edited cancer patients watch their treatments unfold, one of the first CRISPR companies is rejigging a major oncology deal.

Editas Medicine is amending its long-running collaboration with Celgene and their subsidiary Juno Therapeutics. The new deal will expand the focus of their work to cover a subset of immune cells that have become an increasingly hot target for immunotherapy: gamma-delta cells.

Prakash Raman. Flagship

Flag­ship woos No­var­tis top deal­mak­er Prakash Ra­man in move to get the BD ball rolling ear­ly

Flagship Pioneering likes to be ahead of its times — so far ahead, perhaps, that it is often challenging to find partners for their startups while the scientific scaffolding is underway. But Prakash Raman is here to change that.

Raman, who most recently headed up business development at the Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, became Flagship’s first chief business development officer two weeks ago. By acting as a “central resource” for the 100 companies in the venture fund’s portfolio, he hopes to help entrepreneurs and management teams strategize about dealmaking to capture value beyond the near-term validation of their platform technologies, Raman told Endpoints News.

FDA Vas­cepa re­view spot­lights new safe­ty sig­nals, pos­si­ble min­er­al oil spoil­er as Amarin hunts a block­buster ap­proval

An in-house FDA review of Amarin’s Vascepa raises a set of hurdles the biotech will have to clear if the biotech expects to get the long-awaited FDA approval that could set it on a path to superstar status. But it appears that Amarin has survived another potential setback without introducing a major new threat to its prospects.
The stakes don’t get much higher, with analysts saying a win this week for Amarin could lead to billions in new sales — provided the agency stamps it with an OK. And investors liked what they say in the FDA review this morning, bumping the stock $AMRN 17%.
The insider take at the agency includes a note on two new safety signals seen in the big cardio outcomes study of the omega-3 fatty acid drug that shocked many analysts with a solid set of efficacy data. There’s a key concern over whether the use of mineral oil in the placebo skewed LDL levels in such a way that tilted the data in Amarin’s favor.
The FDA overview was written by John Sharretts, the acting deputy director in the Division of Metabolism and Endocrinology Products. 
On the safety side, the internal review focused on a 3.1% versus 2.1% rate of adjudicated events of atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter requiring hospitalization. But they also say a-fib shouldn’t confound the benefit-safety of the drug — given the improvement on MACE — or prevent its use. And then there was also a higher rate of bleeding events in the drug arm.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 65,000+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

FDA puts Sol­id Bio’s lead gene ther­a­py pro­gram on hold — again — af­ter an­oth­er pa­tient is hurt by SGT-001

Solid Biosciences continues to be plagued by safety issues.

Close to 18 months after the gene therapy biotech was able to quickly shed an FDA hold on their lead Duchenne muscular dystrophy program for SGT-001, regulators have stepped back in to force another halt after another patient was hit hard by a set of serious adverse events remarkably similar to the first set.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 65,000+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Bill Haney, Skyhawk

Cel­gene ex­ecs shell out $92M cash for a pair of R&D deals that will fit per­fect­ly in their new home at Bris­tol-My­ers

With Bristol-Myers Squibb’s Celgene buyout all but complete, the BD teams are working in perfect synchrony now. The Celgene side is going back to Skyhawk, a darling of the crowd that set out to drug RNA, and they’re adding a suite of new programs that mesh perfectly with the new regime in charge.

Celgene is shelling out $80 million in a cash upfront to add oncology, immuno-oncology and autoimmune diseases to the initial roundup of neurological targets mapped early in Skyhawk’s existence.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 65,000+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Reata's bar­dox­olone of­fers promise in pa­tients with rare kid­ney dis­or­der

After surprising Wall Street with positive data on its drug, omaveloxolone, in patients suffering from a notoriously hard-to-treat degenerative neuromuscular disorder last month, Reata Pharma on Monday unveiled pivotal results from a trial testing another drug, bardoxolone, in patients with a rare, genetic form of chronic kidney disease for which there exist no approved therapies.

Bardoxolone, like Reata’s other lead drug — omaveloxolone — is a small molecule engineered to bind to a gene called Keap1 to enhance the activity of the protein Nrf2 in order to defuse inflammation.

Kad­mon wax­es rhap­sod­ic on cGVHD re­sults as race with Jakafi heats up

A year ago, Kadmon piqued cautious interest and sent its stock up 20% when it announced positive results from a tiny proof-of-concept study on a new, chronic graft-versus-host-disease treatment. Now interim results are out on the pivotal, and not just the biotech’s executives are gushing about it.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 65,000+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.