Hope S. Rugo, MD: Interchangeability is an interesting area. Extrapolation is much easier because that means that you’ve got a biosimilar that was approved in the neoadjuvant or metastatic setting and can use it, alternatively, in the other setting. For example, if you’re testing a biologic growth factor like filgrastim or pegfilgrastim, if it worked in 1 setting, it’s going to work across other settings. I think that everybody’s been able to embrace that much more easily compared to the drugs that are being used for therapeutic purposes to treat cancers.
There’s growing acceptance that this extrapolation is reasonable, but interchangeability is different. You can switch from the reference to the biosimilar at any time. Interchangeable means that there is little difference. The pharmacist who’s filling the prescription can decide which one they’re going to provide you, based on the criteria—what the insurance requests, what’s cheaper, what they bargained for, et cetera—to get a better group price.
So that would be interchangeability. They don’t have to come back to the provider and say, “You ordered the branded trastuzumab. Can I give this biosimilar instead?” If it’s an interchangeable product, the pharmacist can change.
As described by the regulatory agencies, interchangeability is complex because it requires studies that show that you can switch from one to the other and then back again without changing immunogenicity or safety. Obviously you’re not going to be able to look at efficacy well in that setting. It really hasn’t been studied in any appreciable way for the therapeutic anticancer drugs, and I don’t know that it really will be something that happens in the community. In the United States, pharmacists will generally have to ask, “Can we use the biosimilar?” Much of that will be decided by insurers and by negotiations between our infusion centers and drug providers, in terms of which agent is being provided at a lower cost.
Cornelius F. Waller, MD: Manufacturers go to the regulatory agents when they start production of these biosimilars and ask for guidance either by the FDA or [European Medicines Agency, EMA]. Part of this guidance, after the physical chemical analyses and safety and purity issues, and then based on phase 1 and phase 3 data in patients, is that the manufacturer has to present thorough pharmacovigilance and a safety program that takes place after approval of the drug. As a manufacturer, you have to assure that the production is not being changed because then, in a way, you produce your own biosimilar of what you have produced before and you have to follow certain guidelines to assure that the quality is not changing.
Biosimilar Market Development Requires Strategic Flexibility and Global Partnerships
April 29th 2025Thriving in the evolving biosimilar market demands bold collaboration, early global partnerships, and a fresh approach to development strategies to overcome uncertainty and drive future success.
Biosimilars Development Roundup for October 2024—Podcast Edition
November 3rd 2024On this episode of Not So Different, we discuss the GRx+Biosims conference, which included discussions on data transparency, artificial intelligence (AI), and collaboration to enhance the global supply chain for biosimilars and generic drugs, as well as the evolving requirements for biosimilar devices.
BioRationality: Commemorating the 15th Anniversary of the BPCIA
April 8th 2025Affirming that analytical characterization is often sufficient for biosimilar approval, minimizing unnecessary clinical testing, and enhancing FDA-led education to counter stakeholder misconceptions are key recommendations put forth in this opinion piece by Sarfaraz K. Niazi, PhD.
Exploring the Biosimilar Horizon: Julie Reed's Predictions for 2024
February 18th 2024On this episode of Not So Different, Julie Reed, executive director of the Biosimilars Forum, returns to discuss her predictions for the biosimilar industry for 2024 and beyond as well as the impact that the Forum's 4 new members will have on the organization's mission.
BioRationality: How Developers Can Expand Their Monoclonal Antibody Biosimilar Portfolio
March 24th 2025Monoclonal antibodies lead biosimilar approvals because of their large market size, well-defined regulatory pathways, and technological feasibility, whereas other biologics encounter development challenges but may see increased adoption as regulatory frameworks advance.
Review Calls for Path to Global Harmonization of Biosimilar Development Regulations
March 17th 2025Global biosimilar regulatory harmonization will be needed to reduce development costs and improve patient access, despite challenges posed by differing national requirements and regulatory frameworks, according to review authors.