Development pathways for subcutaneous formulations of biologics versus biosimilar development

Monoclonal antibody and protein therapeutic formulations for subcutaneous delivery: high-concentration, low-volume vs. low-concentration, high-volume

Biologic drugs are used to treat a variety of cancers and chronic diseases. While most of these treatments are administered intravenously by trained healthcare professionals, a noticeable trend has emerged favoring subcutaneous (SC) administration. SC administration of biologics poses several challenges. Biologic drugs often require higher doses for optimal efficacy, surpassing the low volume capacity of traditional SC delivery methods like autoinjectors. Consequently, high concentrations of active ingredients are needed, creating time-consuming formulation obstacles. Alternatives to traditional SC delivery systems are therefore needed to support higher-volume biologic formulations and to reduce development time and other risks associated with high-concentration biologic formulations. Here, we outline key considerations for SC biologic drug formulations and delivery and explore a paradigm shift: the flexibility afforded by low-to-moderate-concentration drugs in high-volume formulations as an alternative to the traditionally difficult approach of high-concentration, low-volume SC formulation delivery.

The Automatic Substitution of Biosimilars: Definitions of Interchangeability are not Interchangeable

In the USA, an interchangeability designation provides biosimilar sponsors with a pathway for achieving what is standard for small-molecule generics: pharmacy-level auto-substitution for an innovator. No other major health authority links interchangeability to automatic substitution, as all require the involvement of the prescriber or patient in a medication change. This editorial considers the clinical impact and practicality of auto-substitution. First, interchangeability is linked to non-medical switching (NMS), the practice of switching treatment in patients with stable disease for non-clinical reasons. NMS may generate negative sentiment in those unwilling or reluctant to switch, which can adversely impact treatment outcomes (i.e., nocebo effect). Indeed, in real-world studies of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, discontinuation rates have been shown to be higher in patients switched to biosimilars for non-medical reasons than in historical cohorts maintained on innovators. Second, interchangeability may impede pharmacovigilance and traceability, as not all jurisdictions require innovators and biosimilars to have distinct biologic names. Third, an interchangeability designation from the US Food and Drug Administration only permits a biosimilar to be automatically substituted for its innovator, not other biosimilars (if available). Pharmacist education would be needed to avoid off-label, automatic substitution among biosimilars of a single innovator. Last, once granted, an interchangeability designation exists in perpetuity under current US federal law. However, the supply chains of innovators and biosimilars are maintained independently, with no requirement for reconfirmation of biosimilarity or interchangeability. We feel that additional guidance is needed for the auto-substitution of biosimilars and innovators to become a reality.

The Challenges of Switching Therapies in an Evolving Multiple Biosimilars Landscape: A Narrative Review of Current Evidence

With the increasing availability of biosimilars, the practice of switching therapies for non-medical reasons between an originator biologic and an analogous biosimilar has become more common. The evidence to support this practice mostly comes from single-switch randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and real-world (RW) evidence studies. However, as more biosimilars of the same originator enter the market, multiple switching events between originators and biosimilars is becoming a reality, despite limited evidence to support the efficacy and safety of such practice. Some countries have established guidelines, policies, or laws related to interchangeability and/or automatic substitution, whereas others have left these practices unregulated or controlled by other components of the healthcare system. Collectively, guidelines on single non-medical switching are often vague, with even less focus given to multiple non-medical switching, leaving this practice mostly unregulated. This narrative review will first discuss the current regulatory perspectives on non-medical switching and challenges associated with switching therapies, particularly with the availability of multiple biosimilars. We will then review the current evidence from RCTs and RW studies in the light of three different multiple-switch scenarios currently taking place in clinical practice: switching between an originator and a single biosimilar, switching between biosimilars of the same originator, and the clinical practice of switching back to the originator (i.e., switchbacks) after a failure of the initial non-medical switch to the analogous biosimilar.

User experience for manual injection of 2 mL viscous solutions is enhanced by a new prefillable syringe with a staked 8 mm ultra-thin wall needle

OBJECTIVES

User experience was compared between a new pre-fillable 2.25 mL glass syringe equipped with an ultra-thin-wall (UTW) 8 mm staked needle and a marketed BD Neopak™ syringe equipped with a special-thin-wall (STW) 12.7 mm staked needle.

METHODS

Participants simulated subcutaneous injections with both syringes alone (formative Human Factors study) and in combination with a needlestick-prevention device (validation Human Factors study).

RESULTS

Usability results of both studies showed higher success rates for delivering the full dose of 2 mL viscous solution (30 cP) with the 8mmUTW syringe than with the 12.7mmSTW one (63% vs. 42% in the formative study). The use of the 8mmUTW syringe demonstrated also better ease of use and acceptance results and 72% of formative study participants preferred this new syringe over the current one when delivering the viscous solution. Using a shorter needle also showed a benefit in decreasing the injection-related anxiety. Besides, in the case of a non-recommended injection technique, the calculated risk of accidental intramuscular injection is reduced by 2 to 13 times with the 8mmUTW syringe.

CONCLUSION

Altogether, the results obtained demonstrated an improvement of the user experience with this new syringe compared to the current one in the manual delivery of 2 mL viscous solutions.