Writing in a Perspectives article, Michele K. Dougherty, PhD, and colleagues at the FDA predict the success of the agency’s biosimilars program and anticipate that as biosimilar development programs continue to mature, there will be an influx of biosimilar approval applications filed at the agency, and that the FDA and the biopharmaceutical industry will continue to build on the lessons learned from early biosimilar development programs.
The FDA has seen a steady increase in biosimilar development programs since the passage of the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (BPCIA), with 9 biosimilars approved by the end of 2017 and 68 active biosimilar programs in development. Writing in a Perspectives article published in the January 2018 issue of Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics, Michele K. Dougherty, PhD, and colleagues at the FDA predict the success of the agency’s biosimilars program and anticipate that as biosimilar development programs continue to mature, there will be an influx of biosimilar approval applications filed at the agency, and that the FDA and the biopharmaceutical industry will continue to build on the lessons learned from early biosimilar development programs. The authors believe the future will bring greater patient access to safe, effective, and presumably more affordable biological products though the approval of more biosimilar products.
Dougherty and her coauthors explain the history of the US biosimilar approval pathway as laid out by the BPCIA, which requires that a proposed biosimilar product demonstrate, through a stepwise development approach, that is has the same strength, route of administration, and dosage form as the FDA-approved reference biologic, and that it uses the same mechanism of action (MOA) for the proposed conditions of use that the reference product previously showed during its approval process. The authors stress that the BPCIA abbreviated licensing pathway for biosimilars is not a lower approval standard, but rather allows for reliance on the FDA’s previous finding of safety and effectiveness for the reference product, promoting a shorter and less costly development program for biosimilars. Biosimilar sponsors provide extensive data from analytic studies, nonclinical studies, and clinical studies, they note, but “the goal of the biosimilar program is not to re-establish the safety and efficacy of the product but rather to demonstrate that the biologic product is biosimilar to the reference product.”
They explain that the “totality of the data” provides evidence of biosimilarity and why no single study is deemed pivotal in the biosimilar approval process. The totality of data and information submitted in the biologic licensing application (BLA) must support the demonstration of biosimilarity; extrapolation of data for different indications must be scientifically justified, and factors considered that include MOA in each indication sought, they note. Concerns about pharmacokinetics, immunogenicity, and toxicity in different patient populations and uses are addressed in this process. The authors conclude that the biosimilar licensing pathway results in biosimilar products that patients and physicians can rely upon as far as safety and effectiveness in the same way that they would for the reference product in each condition of use for which the biosimilar product is approved.
Finally, Dougherty and colleagues note that the FDA aims to increase transparency in the review process for biosimilars, allowing for enhanced communication during the review cycle to achieve more first-cycle approvals. Labeling for biosimilars is an area the FDA and the industry are addressing through guidance and implementation during licensure of the first biosimilar products, as well as interchangeability with the reference product.
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.
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.
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.
A New Chapter: How 2023 Will Shape the US Biosimilar Space for 2024 and Beyond
December 31st 2023On this episode of Not So Different, Cencora's Brian Biehn and Corey Ford take a look back at major policy and regulatory advancements in 2023 and how these changes will alter the space going forward.
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.