Set against a backdrop of rising concern about the cost of insulin, the FDA held a hearing about biosimilar insulins Monday, 10 months before the products transition in March 2020 from the Food Drug and Cosmetic Act to biologics under the Public Health Service Act.
Set against a backdrop of rising concern about the cost of insulin, the FDA held a hearing about biosimilar insulins Monday, 10 months before the products transition in March 2020 from the Food Drug and Cosmetic (FD&C) Act to biologics under the Public Health Service (PHS) Act.
The meeting also came a few days after the FDA released interchangeability guidance for biosimilars. According to remarks made by FDA Acting Commissioner Ned Sharpless, MD, the guidance will help keep prices low, while the transition to a new approval process will speed insulin competition.
The FDA workshop heard from a variety of stakeholders, including Vizient, Inc; Eli Lilly, maker of insulin lispro; Mylan; the JDRF; the American Diabetes Association; and Christine Simmon, of the Association for Accessible Medicines, to name a few.
“We encourage the FDA to build on its significant experience with insulin and foster efficient development of biosimilar insulins to lower costs and increase access for America’s diabetes patients,” said Simmon. “We urge the agency to continue educating providers and patients that transition from a reference product to a non-interchangeable biosimilar will not result in changes to safety or effectiveness.”
Those testifying gave different perspectives depending on their relationship to insulin, as noted in one report.
Mylan, which has so far tried and failed to get FDA approval for a follow-on insulin glargine referencing Lantus, said that the FDA should allow regulators to use previous trial findings or published literature in order to approve a follow-on product.
Meanwhile, Eli Lilly, which makes an insulin lispro injection (Humalog) and recently announced an authorized generic, called for switching studies and said that it gives more backing to the idea that the follow-ons will not generate immunogenicity.
Others testifying at the meeting explained how patients switch between insulins currently, which prompted the issue as to why interchangeable insulins and follow-on, or insulin biosimilars, need to reside in 2 separate categories.
Mariana P. Socal, MD, an assistant scientist at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, said there might be unintended consequences with the 2 separate designations, which patients might find confusing, according to S&P Global Market Intelligence.
For her part, Simmon, of AAM, drew similarities between insulin issues and the biosimilar market overall. “The insulin market in the US is a direct reflection of issues facing biosimilar broadly. The current insulin market lacks significant competition to the detriment of patient access and health and has been characterized as a public health crisis,” she said in her remarks.
“The combination of regulatory challenges, over-patenting to stave off competition, and anti-competitive rebating and contracting tactics by brand firms has been the cause of the lack of competition,” she said. Increases in list price impact insulin affordability, Simmon noted, affecting patient adherence.
Six of the most highly-used brand name insulins increased in list price by more than 500% from 2006 to 2015, she said.
The nation’s largest group purchasing organization, Vizient, said it fully endorses the scientific principles of biosimilarity, and “we believe that molecules necessary to create insulin are well suited for the creation of a biosimilar option for providers and patients,” according to a statement from Steven Lucio, PharmD, BCPS, vice president, pharmacy solutions.
“Insulin biosimilars, once approved, will bring much needed, new competition to the market and will offer more affordable treatment options to patients with diabetes.”
What Stands in the Way of Biosimilar Use Across MENA Countries?
May 21st 2025Despite the clear promise of cost savings and expanded access, the path to integrating generics and biosimilars across the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region is tangled in a web of distrust, inconsistent policies, and deep-rooted cultural preferences for branded drugs.
Escaping the Void: All Things Biosimilars With Craig & G
May 4th 2025To close out the Festival of Biologics, Craig Burton and Giuseppe Randazzo from the Association for Accessible Medicines and the Biosimilars Council tackle the current biosimilar landscape and how the industry can emerge from the "biosimilar void."
The Trump Administration’s Drug Price Actions and Why US Prices Are Already Sky-High
May 17th 2025While the Trump administration’s latest executive order touts sweeping drug price cuts through international benchmarking, the broader pharmaceutical pricing crisis in the US reveals a far more complex web of development costs, profit incentives, and absent price controls—raising the question of whether any single policy, including potential drug tariffs, can truly untangle it.
Will the FTC Be More PBM-Friendly Under a Second Trump Administration?
February 23rd 2025On this episode of Not So Different, we explore the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) second interim report on pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) with Joe Wisniewski from Turquoise Health, discussing key issues like preferential reimbursement, drug pricing transparency, biosimilars, shifting regulations, and how a second Trump administration could reshape PBM practices.
Targeted Reimbursement Encourages Oncology Biosimilar Use
May 7th 2025Incentivizing physicians with modest financial bonuses may seem like a small step, but in Japan’s outpatient oncology setting, it helped push trastuzumab biosimilars toward broader adoption, demonstrating how even limited reimbursement reforms can reshape prescribing behavior under the right conditions.