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

In a stun­ning set­back, Amarin los­es big patent fight over Vas­cepa IP. And its high-fly­ing stock crash­es to earth

Amarin’s shares $AMRN were blitzed Monday evening, losing billions in value as reports spread that the company had lost its high-profile effort to keep its Vascepa patents protected from generic drugmakers.

Amarin had been fighting to keep key patents under lock and key — and away from generic rivals — for another 10 years, but District Court Judge Miranda Du in Las Vegas ruled against the biotech. She ruled that:
(A)ll the Asserted Claims are invalid as obvious under 35 U.S.C.§ 103. Thus, the Court finds in favor of Defendants on Plaintiff’s remaining infringementclaim, and in their favor on their counterclaims asserting the invalidity of the AssertedClaims under 35 U.S.C. § 103.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 77,100+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

UP­DAT­ED: Have a new drug that promis­es to fight Covid-19? The FDA promis­es fast ac­tion but some de­vel­op­ers aren't hap­py

After providing an emergency approval to use malaria drugs against coronavirus with little actual evidence of their efficacy or safety in that setting, the FDA has already proven that it has set aside the gold standard when it comes to the pandemic. And now regulators have spelled out a new approach to speeding development that promises immediate responses in no uncertain terms — promising a program offering the ultimate high-speed pathway to Covid-19 drug approvals.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 77,100+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Once fu­ri­ous over No­var­tis’ da­ta ma­nip­u­la­tion scan­dal, the FDA now says it’s noth­ing they need to take ac­tion on

Back in the BP era — Before Pandemic — the FDA ripped Novartis for its decision to keep the agency in the dark about manipulated data used in its application for Zolgensma while its marketing application for the gene therapy was under review.

Civil and criminal sanctions were being discussed, the agency noted in a rare broadside at one of the world’s largest pharma companies. Notable lawmakers cheered the angry regulators on, urging the FDA to make an example of Novartis, which fielded Zolgensma at $2.1 million — the current record for a one-off therapy.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 77,100+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Covid-19 roundup: GSK, Am­gen tai­lor R&D work to fit the coro­n­avirus age; Doud­na's ge­nomics crew launch­es di­ag­nos­tic lab

You can add Amgen and GSK to the list of deep-pocket drug R&D players who are tailoring their pipeline work to fit a new age of coronavirus.

Following in the footsteps of a lineup of big players like Eli Lilly — which has suspended patient recruitment for drug studies — Amgen and GSK have opted to take a more tailored approach. Amgen is intent on circling the wagons around key studies that are already fully enrolled, and GSK has the red light on new studies while the pandemic plays out.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 77,100+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Mene Pangalos via YouTube

As­traZeneca says its block­buster Farx­i­ga proved to be a game-chang­er in CKD — wrap­ping PhI­II ear­ly

If the FDA can still hold up its end of the bargain, AstraZeneca is already on a short path to scooping up a cutting-edge win with a likely approval for their SGLT2 drug Farxiga in cutting the risk of heart failure. Now the pharma giant says it can point to solid evidence that the drug — initially restricted to diabetes — also works for chronic kidney disease, potentially adding a blockbuster indication for the franchise.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 77,100+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

The race to de­vel­op Covid-19 drugs and vac­cines is on — here’s what’s hap­pen­ing in the UK

Weeks away from the results of ongoing US and China trials testing its experimental antiviral remdesivir, Gilead is going to trial the failed Ebola drug in a small group of coronavirus patients in England and Scotland. The United Kingdom is also home to a range of other therapeutic efforts, as the pandemic rages on across the globe.

On Tuesday, Southampton, UK-based startup Synairgen kicked off a mid-stage placebo-controlled study testing its experimental drug, SNG001 — an inhaled formulation of interferon-beta-1a — that has previously shown to be safe and effective in improving lung function in asthma patients with a respiratory viral infection in a pair of Phase II trials.

‘There was a grow­ing weari­ness’: Rush­ing against a pan­dem­ic clock, As­pen Neu­ro­sciences se­cures $70M Se­ries A

Just before Christmastime, Howard Federoff got a tip from Washington: There was a new virus in China. And this one could be bad.

News report of the virus had not yet appeared. Federoff, a neuroscientist, was briefed because years before, he was vetted as part of a group — he didn’t give a name for the group — to consult for the US government on emerging scientific issues. His day job, though, was CEO of Aspen Neurosciences, a Parkinson’s cell therapy startup that days before had come out of stealth mode and gave word to investors they were hoping to raise $70 million. That, Federoff realized, would be difficult if a pandemic shut down the global economy.

FDA puts pe­di­atric aGVHD drug on pri­or­i­ty re­view lane — will they go vir­tu­al with the ad­comm?

Despite worries about regulatory delays due to new work arrangements under Covid-19, the FDA appears intent to go full speed ahead with its everyday work, not only granting priority review to a stem cell therapy for acute graft versus host disease but also plotting an advisory committee meeting for it.

With a PDUFA date of September 30, the journey of the drug — remestemcel-L, or Ryoncil — could shed light on the agency’s capacity to facilitate drug development unrelated to Covid-19.

Covid-19 roundup: Trump push­es his new fa­vorite, untest­ed drug; CRISPR out­lines crip­pling im­pact of Covid-19

President Trump has a new favorite Covid-19 drug.

After a conversation with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, Politico reports, the president is pressuring the FDA to issue emergency use authorization for favipiravir, a flu drug that showed glimpses of success in China but remains unproven and carries a list of worrying side effects. The push comes after a week-plus in which the White House touted a potentially effective but unproven malaria medication despite the concerns of scientific advisors such as NIAID director Anthony Fauci. And Trump ally Rudy Giuliani has been talking up unproven cell therapy efforts on Twitter.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 77,100+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.