In an article published in Frontiers in Pharmacology, researchers made recommendations to improve the biosimilar regulatory system and refine biosimilar guidelines in China.
Researchers have made recommendations to improve the biosimilar regulatory system and refine biosimilar guidelines in China, in a new article published in Frontiers in Pharmacology.
Although China has the highest number of biosimilar drugs under research in the world (N = 391), laws and regulations for biosimilars in China, including a complete registration management system and supervision policies, are not “clearly formed.” As of the end of 2020, there have been 11 biosimilars approved for the Chinese market.
“There is an urgent need for a corresponding regulatory system for biosimilar drugs. While developing the laws and regulatory system, efforts should be made to avoid any deviations that happened in the evaluation of chemical generics and should focus on completing the task in hand in one attempt,” the authors wrote.
The following recommendations were suggested:
For identifying and obtaining reference drugs, the authors recommended that reference drugs be purchased from the Chinese market or the International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH) national markets approved by China.
Regarding managing labels, it’s difficult to ensure that the macromolecular structural characteristics of biosimilars are consistent with the reference biologics. Labels should state that the product is a biosimilar and include comparative safety and efficacy data “to provide sufficient information for clinicians to make prescription decisions," the authors wrote.
The authors exercised caution with indication extrapolation, saying that “extrapolated indications should be those approved for marketing in China in order to reduce the unknown risks posed by ethnic differences…declaration of all indications of the original biological products should be encouraged when marketed in China, in order to provide a reference basis for the extrapolation of the indications of their biosimilar drugs.”
When naming biosimilars, the authors recommended that biosimilars should have distinct names to attract the attention of clinicians, noting that although using a trade name for a biosimilar may be desirable by companies to establishing brand building, the name method is hard to implement in China because they may violate the current prescription management measures outlined by the Ministry of Health of the People’s Republic of China. The authors argued that a more mature policy environment for biosimilars may need to be established.
Additionally, the authors stressed that incentive policies, such as reimbursement opportunities, are essential to ensure market fairness and access. Prices should be set reasonably and be based on the research and development investment.
"Whether in China or European or American countries, greater price reduction may be the problem that biosimilar drugs need to address directly,” the authors wrote.
Because the Chinese biosimilar market is in its early stages, the authors expressed that physicians should be the sole decision makers on which product patients should be prescribed, recommending that China should hold off on granting interchangeability to biosimilars.
Finally, the authors said that China should establish a biosimilar catalog to encourage biosimilar development and provide information for the general public and health care professionals. The catalog should include approval information, designated reference drugs, and data protection information of the originator.
Reference
Yang J, Zhao X, Li J, et al. Creating China’s biosimilar drugs regulatory system: a calculated approach. Front Pharmacol. Published online February 2, 2023. doi:10.3389/fphar.2022.815074
HHS Praises Biosimilars Savings but Opportunities to Reduce Part B Spending Remain
November 28th 2023Although biosimilars have already generated savings for Medicare Part B programs and beneficiaries, opportunities for substantial reductions in spending remain, according to a report from the HHS.
Biosimilars Regulatory Roundup for September 2023—Podcast Edition
October 1st 2023On this episode, we discuss several regulatory updates from around the globe, including some European and Japanese approvals, the FDA’s 2-day workshop on the present science behind clinical efficacy testing for biosimilars, and streamlining biosimilar development.
Eye on Pharma: Adalimumab Updates; New Eylea Biosimilar Lawsuit; Canada Gains Stelara Biosimilar
November 22nd 2023Several companies make moves to further their adalimumab biosimilars, Regeneron sues Celltrion over biosimilar for Eylea (aflibercept), and Health Canada grants marketing authorization for biosimilar referencing Stelara (ustekinumab).
What AmerisourceBergen's Report Reveals About Payers, Biosimilar Pricing Trends
May 28th 2023On this episode of Not So Different, Tasmina Hydery and Brian Biehn from AmerisourceBergen discussed results from a recent survey, that were also presented at Asembia 2023, diving into the payer perspective on biosimilars and current pricing trends across the US biosimilar industry.
Part 3: Study Questions Usefulness of Clinical Efficacy Trials for Oncology Biosimilars in Europe
November 16th 2023In part 3 of a 3-part series for Global Biosimilars Week, The Center for Biosimilars® reviews an analysis investigating whether clinical efficacy studies have an impact on prescribing decisions for oncology biosimilars across Europe.
Eye on Pharma: Denosumab Biosimilar Data; COA Forms New Committee; IGBA and WHO Collaborate
November 8th 2023Samsung Bioepis releases data for its denosumab biosimilar candidate; the Community Oncology Alliance (COA) forms the Drug Policy and Regulation Committee; the International Generic and Biosimilar Association (IGBA) and the World Health Organization (WHO) collaborate on a new initiative.