Maria Manley, LLM, a life sciences expert and London-based partner with Sidley Austin, provides a deep-dive look at the complexities of Brexit and how it is likely to challenge the biologics industry.
In an interview with The Center for Biosimilars®, Maria Manley, LLM, a London-based partner with Sidley Austin, explored the complex challenges that Brexit, which marked the United Kingdom’s official exit from the European Union, has presented regulators and the biopharmaceutical industry.
In preparation, pharmaceutical companies have had to ensure that they were properly registered and domiciled so that they could continue doing business in the United Kingdom and Europe.
The United Kingdom and the European Union established a free trade agreement without tariffs and quotas. However, border checks and product movement present problems in Northern Ireland, which is a part of the United Kingdom but is still allowed to follow some EU rules. Manley said there are 2 sets of litigation applying to these jurisdictions, which add to the complexities of Brexit.
On the upside, the United Kingdom has agreed to acknowledge temporarily the marketing authorizations for pharmaceutical drugs that were previously approved in the European Union, ensuring that any impacts on drug supply are minimal.
Some of the regulatory changes for the biologics industry includes an end to animal toxicology studies. Further, comparative efficacy studies will be required only if the United Kingdom’s Medicines and Health products Regulatory Agency deems that there is a sufficient reason.
A new approval pathway for biologics was designed with the intention of simplifying the current system and accelerating the process to get innovative medicines on the market. Manley said that the United Kingdom may be willing to accept real world evidence in support of product approval applications.
Additionally, Manley discussed the “rolling review” feature added to the United Kingdom’s medicines approval process, which was created to enable applications to move through regulatory review quickly. This review format will apply to novel biologics, including biosimilars.
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.
How AI Can Help Address Cost-Related Nonadherence to Biologic, Biosimilar Treatment
March 9th 2025Despite saving billions, biosimilars still account for only a small share of the biologics market—what's standing in the way of broader adoption and how can artificial intelligence (AI) help change that?
BioRationality: EMA Accepts Waiver of Clinical Efficacy Testing of Biosimilars
April 21st 2025Sarfaraz K. Niazi, PhD, shares his latest citizen's petition to the FDA, calling on the agency to waive clinical efficacy testing in response to the European Medicines Agency's (EMA) efforts towards the same goal.
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.
How State Substitution Laws Shape Insulin Biosimilar Adoption
April 15th 2025States with fewer restrictions on biosimilar substitution tend to see higher uptake of interchangeable insulin glargine, showing how even small policy details can significantly influence biosimilar adoption and expand access to more affordable insulin.
Experts Pressure Congress to Remove Roadblocks for Biosimilars
April 12th 2025Lawmakers and expert witnesses emphasized the potential of biosimilars to lower health care costs by overcoming barriers like pharmacy benefit manager practices, limited awareness, and regulatory delays to improve access and competition in chronic disease management during a recent congressional hearing.