The process defines the product: what really matters in biosimilar design and production?

Perioperative Implications of Biologics and Immunotherapy

Immune check inhibitors (ICIs) are a class of biologic therapy used for cancer treatment that enhances T-cell recognition of cancer cells. Toxicities from ICIs are described as immune-related adverse events (irAEs) with Grade 1 to 2 irAEs representing mild-to-moderate toxicity and Grade 3 to 4 irAEs representing severe to life-threatening toxicity. The long half-life of ICIs contributes to the extended and unpredictable nature of irAEs. ICI therapy is typically stopped for Grade 3 to 4 irAEs except for endocrinopathies if clinically optimized. Toxicities can involve any organ system; therefore, a thorough preoperative assessment is imperative to ensure appropriate clinical management.

Biosimilar monoclonal antibodies for cancer treatment in adults

BACKGROUND

Biosimilars are products containing an approved biological medicine. They are similar, but not identical, to an originator medicine. In cancer, biosimilars have been developed from the monoclonal antibodies, bevacizumab, rituximab, and trastuzumab. They have become available for the treatment of lung, colorectal, non-Hodkin's lymphoma, and breast cancers. As these biological products are not identical, synthesis of evidence of the clinical effects of biosimilars compared to their originators is needed to understand their comparative effectiveness and harms.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of biosimilar monoclonal antibodies versus their originator drugs for adults with cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched bibliographic (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science) and clinical trials databases to February 2024.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included head-to-head randomised controlled trials conducted in adults with cancer treated with biosimilar or originator monoclonal antibodies.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methodology. Primary outcomes were progression-free survival, duration of response, overall survival, breast cancer's pathological complete response, serious adverse events, and health-related quality of life. If survival estimates were adjusted or provided as rates, we did not combine them. We used Cochrane's RoB 1 tool to assess the risk of bias and GRADE to evaluate the certainty of evidence of critical and important outcomes according to the relevance determined by consumers.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 55 studies with 22,046 adults (23 of bevacizumab, 10,639 participants with colorectal or lung cancer; 17 of rituximab, 4412 participants with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma; and 15 of trastuzumab, 6995 participants with breast cancer). Studies were conducted in all continents, most were multicentre, and all were funded by the drug manufacturer. Participants' ages ranged from 47 (mean) to 62 (median) years and the proportion of women from 18% to 100%. Fifteen studies were conducted as non-inferiority and 40 as equivalence. The overall risk of bias was low; main biases were in the incomplete outcome data and selective reporting domains. Bevacizumab biosimilar versus bevacizumab originator in lung or colorectal cancer Progression-free survival is likely similar between bevacizumab biosimilar and the originator (per 1000: 380 in both groups at 12 months, hazard ratio (HR) 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.91 to 1.09; 5 studies, 2660 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There were no differences in lung or colorectal cancer subgroups. Bevacizumab biosimilar is likely similar to the originator in duration of response (per 1000: 219 participants who achieved response progressed with biosimilar versus 210 with originator at 12 months; HR 1.05, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.37; 1 study, 762 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and overall survival (per 1000: 592 with biosimilar versus 610 with originator at 12 months; HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.19; 5 studies, 2783 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There were no differences in cancer type subgroups. Bevacizumab biosimilar is likely similar to the originator in serious adverse events (per 1000: 303 with biosimilar versus 309 with originator; risk ratio (RR) 0.98, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.03; 23 studies, 10,619 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Bevacizumab biosimilar may be similar to originator in health-related quality of life as scores were comparable in the one study that assessed this outcome in metastatic colorectal cancer (low-certainty evidence). This critical outcome was not assessed in other biosimilars comparisons. Bevacizumab biosimilar is likely similar to originator in objective response (per 1000: 481 with biosimilar versus 501 with originator; RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.00; 23 studies, 10,054 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and mortality (per 1000: 287 with biosimilar versus 279 with originator; RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.09; 19 studies, 9231 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There were no differences in lung or colorectal cancers. Rituximab biosimilar versus rituximab originator in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma Rituximab biosimilar is likely similar to originator in progression-free survival (7 studies, 2456 participants), duration of response (2 studies, 522 participants), and overall survival (7 studies, 2353 participants; data not pooled as survival estimates were adjusted for different factors or reported as rates) (all moderate-certainty evidence). Rituximab biosimilar is likely similar to originator in the risk of serious adverse events (per 1000: 210 with biosimilar versus 204 with originator; RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.14; 15 studies, 4197 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and objective response (per 1000: 807 with biosimilar versus 799 with originator; RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.04; 16 studies, 3922 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). No study reported quality of life. Rituximab biosimilar is similar to originator in mortality (per 1000: 52 with biosimilar versus 53 with originator; RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.35; 8 studies, 2557 participants; high-certainty evidence). Trastuzumab biosimilar versus trastuzumab originator in breast cancer Trastuzumab biosimilar is likely similar to originator in progression-free survival (4 studies, 2221 participants), duration of response (3 studies, 1488 participants), and overall survival (6 studies, 2221 participants), which were not pooled due to adjustment for different factors or provided as rates. No study reported quality of life. Trastuzumab biosimilar may be similar to originator in pathological complete response (per 1000: 459 with biosimilar versus 433 with originator; RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.17; 7 studies, 3403 participants; low-certainty evidence), is likely similar in serious adverse events (per 1000: 129 in both groups; RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.17; 13 studies, 6183 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and slightly increases objective response (per 1000: 801 with biosimilar versus 777 with originator; RR 1.03, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.05; 13 studies, 5509 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with bevacizumab, rituximab, and trastuzumab biosimilars are likely similar to their originator drugs in terms of their impact on progression-free survival, duration of response, overall survival, serious adverse events, objective response, and mortality. Limited evidence showed similarity in pathological complete response for trastuzumab and quality of life for bevacizumab compared with originators, which was not assessed in the other comparisons. The overall certainty of evidence was moderate and imprecision was the main reason for downgrading our certainty in the findings.

β'-COP mediated loading of PPARγ into trophoblast-derived extracellular vesicles

Fetal growth restriction (FGR) is characterized by impaired fetal growth and dysregulated lipid metabolism. Extracellular vesicles (EVs) have been proved playing a crucial role in transporting biomolecules from the mother to the fetus. However, the mechanisms underlying cargo sorting and loading into trophoblastic EVs remain elusive. This study focuses on examining how the essential fatty acid regulator, peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPARγ), is sorted and loaded into EVs originating from trophoblasts. We conducted proteomic analysis on placenta-derived EVs from normal and FGR pregnancies. Interactions between PPARγ and coat protein complex I (COPI) subunit were evaluated using co-immunoprecipitation and bioinformatics simulation. Molecular dynamics simulations were conducted to identify critical binding sites between β'-coat protein complex I (β'-COP), a subunit of COPI, and PPARγ. lentivirus-mediated knockout and overexpression techniques were employed to elucidate the role of β'-COP in PPARγ loading into EVs. Our findings demonstrate that PPARγ protein levels are significantly decreased in EVs from FGR placentas. β'-COP subunit directly interacts with PPARγ in trophoblasts, mediating its sorting into early endosomes and multivesicular bodies for EVs incorporation. Knockout of β'-COP impaired PPARγ loading into EVs. Molecular dynamics simulations identified critical binding sites for the interaction between β'-COP and PPARγ. Mutation of these sites significantly weakened the β'-COP-PPARγ interaction and reduced PPARγ levels in trophoblastic EVs. In conclusion, β'-COP mediates sorting and loading of PPARγ into trophoblastic EVs. This study provides insights into regulating EVs cargo loading and potential strategies for targeted cargo delivery from the maternal to the fetal circulation.

Introducing the Biosimilar Paradigm to Neurology: The Totality of Evidence for the First Biosimilar Natalizumab

A biosimilar medicine is a successor to a reference ('originator'/'original-brand') biologic medicine brought to market once the patent and exclusive marketing rights for the reference have expired. Biosimilar natalizumab (PB006 [biosim-NTZ]; developed by Polpharma Biologics S.A. and marketed globally as Tyruko®; Sandoz) has been developed as a successor to reference natalizumab (Tysabri® [ref-NTZ]; Biogen) and is the first US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved and European Medicines Agency (EMA)-approved biosimilar in neurology. As per the FDA and EMA indications for ref-NTZ, biosim-NTZ is approved to treat relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis (USA, EU) and Crohn's disease (USA only). Approval of biosim-NTZ was based on the 'totality of evidence', a comprehensive body of data collected during the development process, demonstrating similarity to its reference medicine. The foundational step of demonstrating structural and functional similarity between biosim-NTZ and ref-NTZ confirmed identical primary and indistinguishable higher order structures, as well as matching binding affinity to α4β1/α4β7 integrins. Following the confirmation of matching structure and function, pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic similarity of biosim-NTZ to ref-NTZ in healthy subjects was demonstrated, with no clinically meaningful differences identified in safety and immunogenicity. A comparative, double-blind, randomized study (Antelope) was also conducted in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis and demonstrated matching efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity with no clinically meaningful differences between biosim-NTZ and ref-NTZ. This review presents the totality of evidence that confirmed the biosimilarity of biosimilar natalizumab to its reference medicine, which supported its approval by the FDA and the EMA. [Graphical plain language summary available].

Improved injection site reactions after switching from adalimumab reference to adalimumab biosimilar LBAL for ulcerative colitis: A case report

RATIONALE

Adalimumab (ADA) is an antitumor necrosis factor agent that is used for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease. However, its cost has resulted in varying degrees of restricted access across global healthcare economies. Biosimilars are agents that contain a similar version of the active substance of an already approved original biologic agent and are intended to be used for the same indication as the reference product. In general, biosimilars follow the originator; therefore, information on its efficacy and safety had been few. Some studies have reported on replacement of the originator with a biosimilar of the same efficacy because of medical reasons.

PATIENT CONCERNS

A 15-year-old girl with steroid-dependent ulcerative colitis that relapsed after vedolizumab was treated with ADA reference. Six weeks after starting ADA reference, her gastrointestinal symptoms had completely resolved, however, immediately after the eighth dose of ADA reference, redness, swelling, and pruritus were noted at the injection site on the left thigh.

DIAGNOSIS

Allergic reaction caused by the ADA reference.

INTERVENTION

ADA reference was changed to ADA biosimilar LBAL.

OUTCOMES

ADA biosimilar LBAL was continued without any symptoms, such as local swelling, redness, or itching. In addition, there was no deterioration of gastrointestinal symptoms.

LESSONS

We showed the efficacy and safety of ADA biosimilar LBAL as an alternative to ADA reference, which caused injection site reactions. Changing from ADA reference to ADA biosimilar because of adverse events may be an option that needs careful observation, considering that the originator and the biosimilar are not exactly the same.

Versatility of OnabotulinumtoxinA in Aesthetic Medicine

BACKGROUND

OnabotulinumtoxinA is an injectable product that was introduced into medicine in the 1970s and has been the subject of thousands of clinical and nonclinical publications.

OBJECTIVE

To review the data related to the versatility of onabotulinumtoxinA in medical aesthetics.

METHODS

PubMed was searched to identify literature evaluating the effects of onabotulinumtoxinA, with preference given to randomized, placebo-controlled trials and safety meta-analyses.

RESULTS

OnabotulinumtoxinA is effective and safe across multiple facial indications, racial and ethnic groups, age groups, genders, and facial line severities. Patient-reported outcomes have been prioritized in aesthetic clinical trials and indicate high patient satisfaction and appearance-related psychological outcomes. Integrated safety meta-analysis and immunogenicity analyses have documented acceptable adverse event rates and low immunogenicity of onabotulinumtoxinA.

CONCLUSION

OnabotulinumtoxinA is a versatile aesthetic product supported by a strong literature base and positive physician and patient-reported outcomes that reflect a meaningful impact on patient's quality of life.

Outcomes following switching from etanercept originator to etanercept biosimilar in 1024 patients with RA: a matched-analysis of the BSRBR-RA

OBJECTIVES

Adults with RA are being switched from etanercept originator to biosimilar in non-medical/cost-saving switching. This analysis aims to investigate outcomes in these patients, including (i) drug survival and (ii) disease activity at 6 months and 12 months, compared with those who remain on the originator.

METHODS

Using BSRBR-RA, those who switched directly from etanercept originator to biosimilar were identified and matched to patients receiving the originator, based on gender, age, disease duration and originator start year. Drug survival was calculated; Cox-proportional hazard models assessed differences in drug persistence between those who switched vs remaining on originator. Change in DAS28 after 6 months and 12 months was compared between cohorts. Multiple imputation was used.

RESULTS

A total of 1024 adults with RA switching from etanercept originator to biosimilar were included, with a matched cohort of patients remaining on the originator. Patients who switched onto a biosimilar product were no more likely to discontinue etanercept treatment vs those who remained on the originator; hazard ratio 1.06 (95%CI 0.89-1.26), with 65% of patients remaining on treatment at three years. Ninety-five (9%) patients switched back to the originator within the first year. After 6 months and 12 months, biosimilar patients were no more likely to have a worsening of DAS28 (>0.6 units) compared with those who remained on the originator.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the largest matched comparative effectiveness analysis showing patients switching from etanercept originator to biosimilar appearing to do just as well with regard to disease activity and drug persistence compared with those who remained on the originator. These data will be reassuring to clinicians and patients regarding non-medical switching.

Outcomes after anti-tumour necrosis factor originator to biosimilar switching in children and young people with juvenile idiopathic arthritis in the UK: a national cohort study

BACKGROUND

For cost-saving purposes, children and young people with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) are being switched (for non-medical reasons) from biological originators to biosimilars. Here, we aimed to investigate those who switched from an anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) originator to a biosimilar, regarding drug survival and disease activity, compared with a matched cohort who continued the originator.

METHODS

This analysis included all patients in the UK JIA Biologics Register switching directly from an anti-TNF originator to a biosimilar of the same product. All patients were matched (age, sex, disease duration, calendar year of when patients started originator therapy, line of therapy, and International League of Associations for Rheumatology [ILAR] category) to patients continuing the originator. For those matched successfully, a Cox proportional hazard model assessed whether drug persistence differed between those who switched compared with those who continued the originator. Overall change in the 71-joint juvenile arthritis disease activity score and the proportion of patients with a clinically important worsening score (by ≥1·7 units) after 6 months was compared between cohorts. This analysis was designed to address a priority research area set by our patient partners.

FINDINGS

There were 224 children and young people with non-systemic JIA (139 [62%] were female, and 85 [38%] were male) identified as switching from a biological originator to a biosimilar of the same product from Jan 1, 2017, to July 7, 2023. 143 (64%) patients were originally on adalimumab, 56 (25%) on etanercept, and 25 (11%) on infliximab. Of these, 164 patients were matched successfully to those continuing the originator. There was no evidence that patients switching were more likely to stop treatment compared with those continuing the originator, with a hazard ratio of 1·46 (95% CI 0·93-2·30). Of the 51 patients in the biosimilar group who stopped treatment, 18 (35%) switched back to the originator (14 in the first year), 28 (55%) started a different biological drug, and five (10%) discontinued all treatment by the last follow-up. Of the 87 matched patients with available disease activity, there was no evidence that JADAS-71 worsened more after 6 months, with an odds ratio of 0·71 (95% CI 0·34-1·51; p=0·38).

INTERPRETATION

In this matched comparative effectiveness analysis, children and young people with JIA switched from originators to biosimilars. Disease activity was similar between patients switching compared with those continuing the originator. Three quarters of patients were still receiving their biosimilar after 1 year, with switching back to originator uncommon, at only 9% after 1 year, suggesting good tolerability of non-medical switching in this patient population. This information is reassuring to clinicians and patients regarding the effect of non-medical biological switching.

FUNDING

British Society for Rheumatology, Versus Arthritis, and National Institutes for Health Research Manchester Biomedical Research Centre.

Biosimilars of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor for ophthalmic diseases: A review

The development of intravitreally injected biologic medicines (biologics) acting against vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) substantially improved the clinical outcomes of patients with common VEGF-driven retinal diseases. The relatively high cost of branded agents, however, represents a financial burden for most healthcare systems and patients, likely resulting in impaired access to treatment and poorer clinical outcomes for some patients. Biosimilar medicines (biosimilars) are clinically equivalent, potentially economic alternatives to reference products. Biosimilars approved by leading health authorities have been demonstrated to be similar to the reference product in a comprehensive comparability exercise, generating the totality of evidence necessary to support analytical, pre-clinical, and clinical biosimilarity. Anti-VEGF biosimilars have been entering the field of ophthalmology in the US since 2022. We review regulatory and scientific concepts of biosimilars, the biosimilar development landscape in ophthalmology, with a specific focus on anti-VEGF biosimilars, and discuss opportunities and challenges facing the uptake of biosimilars.

Update on Non-Interchangeability of Botulinum Neurotoxin Products

The growing use of botulinum neurotoxins (BoNTs) for medical and aesthetic purposes has led to the development and marketing of an increasing number of BoNT products. Given that BoNTs are biological medications, their characteristics are heavily influenced by their manufacturing methods, leading to unique products with distinct clinical characteristics. The manufacturing and formulation processes for each BoNT are proprietary, including the potency determination of reference standards and other features of the assays used to measure unit potency. As a result of these differences, units of BoNT products are not interchangeable or convertible using dose ratios. The intrinsic, product-level differences among BoNTs are compounded by differences in the injected tissues, which are innervated by different nerve fiber types (e.g., motor, sensory, and/or autonomic nerves) and require unique dosing and injection sites that are particularly evident when treating complex therapeutic and aesthetic conditions. It is also difficult to compare across studies due to inherent differences in patient populations and trial methods, necessitating attention to study details underlying each outcome reported. Ultimately, each BoNT possesses a unique clinical profile for which unit doses and injection paradigms must be determined individually for each indication. This practice will help minimize unexpected adverse events and maximize efficacy, duration, and patient satisfaction. With this approach, BoNT is poised to continue as a unique tool for achieving individual goals for an increasing number of medical and aesthetic indications.

Basic regulatory science behind drug substance and drug product specifications of monoclonal antibodies and other protein therapeutics

In this review, we focus on providing basics and examples for each component of the protein therapeutic specifications to interested pharmacists and biopharmaceutical scientists with a goal to strengthen understanding in regulatory science and compliance. Pharmaceutical specifications comprise a list of important quality attributes for testing, references to use for test procedures, and appropriate acceptance criteria for the tests, and they are set up to ensure that when a drug product is administered to a patient, its intended therapeutic benefits and safety can be rendered appropriately. Conformance of drug substance or drug product to the specifications is achieved by testing an article according to the listed tests and analytical methods and obtaining test results that meet the acceptance criteria. Quality attributes are chosen to be tested based on their quality risk, and consideration should be given to the merit of the analytical methods which are associated with the acceptance criteria of the specifications. Acceptance criteria are set forth primarily based on efficacy and safety profiles, with an increasing attention noted for patient-centric specifications. Discussed in this work are related guidelines that support the biopharmaceutical specification setting, how to set the acceptance criteria, and examples of the quality attributes and the analytical methods from 60 articles and 23 pharmacopeial monographs. Outlooks are also explored on process analytical technologies and other orthogonal tools which are on-trend in biopharmaceutical characterization and quality control.

Comparison of SB17 and reference ustekinumab in healthy adults: A randomized, double-blind, single-dose, phase I study

OBJECTIVE

This study compared the pharmacokinetic (PK) characteristics of SB17 (Samsung Bioepis, Incheon, Republic of Korea), a proposed biosimilar of ustekinumab (UST) against reference UST (Stelara, Janssen Biotech, Horsham, PA, USA).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This double-blind, three-arm, parallel-group, single-dose study randomized 201 healthy adult subjects 1 : 1 : 1 to receive 45 mg of SB17, European Union-sourced UST (EU-UST) or United States of America-sourced UST (US-UST) via subcutaneous (SC) injection. Primary endpoints were area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity (AUCinf) and maximum serum concentration (Cmax). Safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity were investigated.

RESULTS

All 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for the ratios of AUCinf and Cmax between groups were within the predefined bioequivalence margin of 0.8 - 1.25. The geometric LSMeans ratios of AUCinf and Cmax were 0.99 and 0.90 for SB17/EU-UST, 1.01 and 0.94 for SB17/US-UST, and 1.02 and 1.05 for EU-UST/US-UST, respectively. The proportion of subjects with treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was comparable between SB17, EU-UST, and US-UST (68.7, 58.2, and 65.7%). No deaths, serious adverse events (SAEs), or severe TEAEs were reported. The incidence of subjects testing positive for post-dose anti-drug antibodies (ADAs) was 26.9%, 34.3%, and 34.3% in the SB17, EU-UST, and US-UST groups, respectively. Among the subjects with a positive ADA result at day 99/end of study, 53.8% (SB17 n = 5, EU-UST n = 12, and US-UST n = 11) were positive for neutralizing antibodies (NAbs).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated bioequivalence of SB17, EU-UST, and US-UST in terms of PK. Safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity were also comparable between all groups.

Cancer treatment with biosimilar drugs: A review

Biosimilars are biological drugs created from living organisms or that contain living components. They share an identical amino-acid sequence and immunogenicity. These drugs are considered to be cost-effective and are utilized in the treatment of cancer and other endocrine disorders. The primary aim of biosimilars is to predict biosimilarity, efficacy, and treatment costs; they are approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and have no clinical implications. They involve analytical studies to understand the similarities and dissimilarities. A biosimilar manufacturer sets up FDA-approved reference products to evaluate biosimilarity. The contribution of next-generation sequencing is evolving to study the organ tumor and its progression with its impactful therapeutic approach on cancer patients to showcase and target rare mutations. The study shall help to understand the future perspectives of biosimilars for use in gastro-entero-logic diseases, colorectal cancer, and thyroid cancer. They also help target specific organs with essential mutational categories and drug prototypes in clinical practices with blood and liquid biopsy, cell treatment, gene therapy, recombinant therapeutic proteins, and personalized medications. Biosimilar derivatives such as monoclonal antibodies like trastuzumab and rituximab are common drugs used in cancer therapy. Escherichia coli produces more than six antibodies or antibody-derived proteins to treat cancer such as filgrastim, epoetin alfa, and so on.

Unleashing the power of antibodies: Engineering for tomorrow's therapy

Antibodies play a crucial role in host defense against various diseases. Antibody engineering is a multidisciplinary field that seeks to improve the quality of life of humans. In the context of disease, antibodies are highly specialized proteins that form a critical line of defense against pathogens and the disease caused by them. These infections trigger the innate arm of immunity by presenting on antigen-presenting cells such as dendritic cells. This ultimately links to the adaptive arm, where antibody production and maturation occur against that particular antigen. Upon binding with their specific antigens, antibodies trigger various immune responses to eliminate pathogens in a process called complement-dependent cytotoxicity and phagocytosis of invading microorganisms by immune cells or induce antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity is done by antibodies. These engineered antibodies are being used for various purposes, such as therapeutics, diagnostics, and biotechnology research. Cutting-edge techniques that include hybridoma technology, transgenic mice, display techniques like phage, yeast and ribosome displays, and next-generation sequencing are ways to engineer antibodies and mass production for the use of humankind. Considering the importance of antibodies in protecting from a diverse array of pathogens, investing in research holds great promise to develop future therapeutic targets to combat various diseases.

Biosimilars in IBD: What Every Clinician Needs to Know

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Biosimilars were introduced to decrease biologic-related expenditures, but their uptake in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) remains suboptimal. Herein, we review biosimilar concepts, current products available for IBD treatment, and resources to support biosimilar utilization.

RECENT FINDINGS

Although a cornerstone of IBD treatment, biologics are costly due to their development. Biosimilars, which are biologic products highly similar to a reference product, aim to decrease these expenditures. Infliximab, adalimumab, and ustekinumab biosimilars are approved for IBD, but uptake remains low due to biosimilar efficacy and safety concerns and delayed market entry. Clinicians can effectively address some of these barriers and help patients and healthcare systems reap the benefits of decreased costs and increased treatment access. Data shows comparable efficacy and safety outcomes with biosimilars in IBD. Several biosimilar products are available and in the pipeline, but efforts are needed from various stakeholders to bolster utilization and generate benefits.

An Overview of Biosimilars-Development, Quality, Regulatory Issues, and Management in Healthcare

Biological therapies have transformed high-burden treatments. As the patent and exclusivity period for biological medicines draws to a close, there is a possibility for the development and authorization of biosimilars. These products boast comparable levels of safety, quality, and effectiveness to their precursor reference products. Biosimilars, although similar to reference products, are not identical copies and should not be considered generic substitutes for the original. Their development and evaluation involve a rigorous step-by-step process that includes analytical, functional, and nonclinical evaluations and clinical trials. Clinical studies conducted for biosimilars aim to establish similar efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity, rather than demonstrating a clinical benefit, as with the reference product. However, although the current knowledge regarding biosimilars has significantly increased, several controversies and misconceptions still exist regarding their immunogenicity, extrapolation, interchangeability, substitution, and nomenclature. The development of biosimilars stimulates market competition, contributes toward healthcare sustainability, and allows for greater patient access. However, maximizing the benefits of biosimilars requires cooperation between regulators and developers to ensure that patients can benefit quickly from access to these new therapeutic alternatives while maintaining high standards of quality, safety, and efficacy. Recognizing the inherent complexities of comprehending biosimilars fully, it is essential to focus on realistic approaches, such as fostering open communication between healthcare providers and patients, encouraging informed decision-making, and minimizing risks. This review addresses the regulatory and manufacturing requirements for biosimilars and provides clinicians with relevant insights for informed prescribing.

Ranibizumab Biosimilars in Treating Retinal Disorders: A Cost-Effective Revolution?

Ranibizumab, is a humanized, monoclonal antibody fragment that binds and inactivates vascular endothelial growth factor-A (VEGF-A) and VEGF-B. One of the main indications for an intravitreal treatment with ranibizumab is age-related macular degeneration (AMD), which is a retinal disease with a high worldwide socioeconomic impact. Biosimilars constitute biological products that demonstrate similar pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic characteristics with a reference product, as well as comparable clinical efficacy, safety and immunogenicity. Since the approval of the first biosimilar Razumab, there has been a variety of new biosimilars available on the market. They offer the advantage of the same good clinical and safety results at a better price. All Ranibizumab biosimilars that have gained approval were tested in double masked Phase 3 clinical studies. The use of Ranibizumab biosimilars in neovascular AMD is well reported in the bibliography. Nevertheless, over the last few years, there is a tendency of using biosimilars in other retinal diseases like retinopathy of prematurity (ROP), diabetic macular edema (DME) or polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy (PCV). In conclusion, ranibizumab biosimilars offer a promising avenue for the management of retinal diseases, especially in countries with lower socioeconomic status, where there is lack of availability of innovator ranibizumab. However, further research is required to fully explore their efficacy, safety, and long-term outcomes in a plethora of retinal diseases.

Biosimilars: From Production to Patient

Biologic drugs are large, complex molecules produced through biotechnology. A biosimilar is a biologic product that is highly similar to an already approved biologic (reference product), with no clinically meaningful differences in purity, safety, or efficacy; as such, a biosimilar does not need to undergo the same level of study in a clinical trial program as the original reference product. Due to the potential impact of biosimilars on patient access and health care systems, the US Food and Drug Administration introduced an abbreviated pathway for approving biosimilars (351[k]) in 2009. There is strong evidence that switching from a reference product to a biosimilar does not reduce treatment effectiveness or increase the risk of adverse events. Biosimilars may reduce costs and increase patient access to biologic therapies. Biosimilar use in the United States has increased, as have the associated biosimilar cost savings, which are expected to reach $104 billion between 2020 and 2024. Yet, a need remains for increased knowledge among health care professionals and patients. Prescriber confidence is key to patient acceptance of biosimilars and minimizing the incidence of the nocebo effect. Infusion nurses are well positioned to help educate patients and to improve clinical outcomes across a range of diseases.

Green Biologics: Harnessing the Power of Plants to Produce Pharmaceuticals

Plants are increasingly used for the production of high-quality biological molecules for use as pharmaceuticals and biomaterials in industry. Plants have proved that they can produce life-saving therapeutic proteins (Elelyso™-Gaucher's disease treatment, ZMapp™-anti-Ebola monoclonal antibodies, seasonal flu vaccine, Covifenz™-SARS-CoV-2 virus-like particle vaccine); however, some of these therapeutic proteins are difficult to bring to market, which leads to serious difficulties for the manufacturing companies. The closure of one of the leading companies in the sector (the Canadian biotech company Medicago Inc., producer of Covifenz) as a result of the withdrawal of investments from the parent company has led to the serious question: What is hindering the exploitation of plant-made biologics to improve health outcomes? Exploring the vast potential of plants as biological factories, this review provides an updated perspective on plant-derived biologics (PDB). A key focus is placed on the advancements in plant-based expression systems and highlighting cutting-edge technologies that streamline the production of complex protein-based biologics. The versatility of plant-derived biologics across diverse fields, such as human and animal health, industry, and agriculture, is emphasized. This review also meticulously examines regulatory considerations specific to plant-derived biologics, shedding light on the disparities faced compared to biologics produced in other systems.

Etanercept originator versus etanercept biosimilar for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis as a first biologic: results from the BSRBR-RA

OBJECTIVES

Etanercept biosimilars show comparable efficacy to their originators among biologic-naïve patients with RA in randomized controlled trials. Nationwide guidelines have obligated prescribing of etanercept biosimilars from 2016, resulting in significant cost savings. This analysis aimed to compare the effectiveness of etanercept originator vs etanercept biosimilar amongst biologic-naïve RA patients treated in routine clinical practice in the UK.

METHODS

Biologic-naïve RA patients starting etanercept in the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Register in Rhematoid Arthritis (BSRBR-RA) cohort study from 2010 were included. Data collected at start of therapy includes patient demographics and disease activity. Follow-up data includes changes in disease activity and anti-rheumatic therapy. Six- and 12-month primary outcomes include DAS for 28-joints (DAS28) remission, EULAR response and minimal clinically important difference in function. Etanercept drug survival was assessed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression, including reasons for treatment withdrawal. Multiple imputation accounted for missing data. Propensity-decile adjustment was used to account for confounding by indication.

RESULTS

A total of 1806 biologic-naïve RA patients started etanercept: 1009 originator, 797 biosimilar. At 6 and 12 months, the proportion of patients achieving DAS28 remission and EULAR response were similar between treatments. During follow-up, 19% of originator patients switched onto etanercept biosimilar. Patients were censored at time of switch. Patients on originator were no more likely to stop therapy vs biosimilar; 71% of originator and 76% of biosimilar patients remained on therapy at 1 year.

CONCLUSIONS

In one of the largest analyses of patients with RA, biologic-naïve RA patients treated with etanercept originator showed similar outcomes vs biosimilar using real-world data. Drug survival, and disease activity after 6 and 12 months of therapy, was similar between cohorts.

Mesenchymal stem cell secretome and extracellular vesicles for neurodegenerative diseases: Risk-benefit profile and next steps for the market access

Neurodegenerative diseases represent a growing burden on healthcare systems worldwide. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) have shown promise as a potential therapy due to their neuroregenerative, neuroprotective, and immunomodulatory properties, which are, however, linked to the bioactive substances they release, collectively known as secretome. This paper provides an overview of the most recent research on the safety and efficacy of MSC-derived secretome and extracellular vesicles (EVs) in clinical (if available) and preclinical models of Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, multiple sclerosis, Huntington's disease, acute ischemic stroke, and spinal cord injury. The article explores the biologically active substances within MSC-secretome/EVs, the mechanisms responsible for the observed therapeutic effects, and the strategies that may be used to optimize MSC-secretome/EVs production based on specific therapeutic needs. The review concludes with a critical discussion of current clinical trials and a perspective on potential future directions in translating MSC-secretome and EVs into the clinic, specifically regarding how to address the challenges associated with their pharmaceutical manufacturing, including scalability, batch-to-batch consistency, adherence to Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP) guidelines, formulation, and storage, along with quality controls, access to the market and relative costs, value for money and impact on total expenditure.

Understanding Biosimilar Insulins - Development, Manufacturing, and Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND

A wave of expiring patents for first-generation insulin analogues has created opportunities in the global insulin market for highly similar versions of these products, biosimilar insulins. Biologics are generally large, complex molecules produced through biotechnology in a living system, such as a microorganism, plant cell, or animal cell. Since manufacturing processes of biologics vary, biosimilars cannot be exact copies of their reference product but must exhibit a high degree of functional and structural similarity. Biosimilarity is proven by analytical approaches in comparative assessments, preclinical cell-based and animal studies, as well as clinical studies in humans facilitating the accumulation of evidence across all assessments. The approval of biosimilars follows detailed regulatory pathways derived from those of their reference products and established by agencies such as the European Medicines Agency and the US Food and Drug Administration. Regulatory authorities impose requirements to ensure that biosimilars meet high standards of quality, safety, and efficacy and are highly similar to their reference product.

PURPOSE

This review aims to aid clinical understanding of the high standards of development, manufacturing, and regulation of biosimilar insulins.

METHODS

Recent relevant studies indexed by PubMed and regulatory documents were included.

CONCLUSIONS

Driven by price competition, the emergence of biosimilar insulins may help expand global access to current insulin analogues. To maximize the impact of the advantage for falling retail costs of biosimilar insulins compared with that of reference insulins, healthcare professionals and insulin users must gain further awareness and confidence.

Future Evolution of Biosimilar Development by Application of Current Science and Available Evidence: The Developer's Perspective

Biosimilars have been available in the USA for over a decade, and in Europe for almost two decades. In that time, biosimilars have become established in the treatment landscape for a wide range of diseases, facilitating patient access and affordability of healthcare. However, patients can still struggle to access biological therapies in some markets. There is a need to streamline the process of developing biosimilars without compromising their quality, safety, or efficacy. This opinion piece considers the efficiencies that could be achieved within the biosimilar approval process. In clinical trials for biosimilars, clinical efficacy endpoints have been shown to be less sensitive measures of biosimilarity than biochemical, biophysical, and biological functional assays. Additional clinical efficacy studies comparing potential biosimilars and reference products do not add information that is useful for regulatory purposes. Large clinical studies of biosimilars with immunogenicity endpoints are of limited value, given the quality control processes in place for all biologics, including biosimilars. The expectation for multiple-switch studies for US interchangeability designation should be reconsidered immediately, and the category should be eliminated in the future. As biosimilars are typically approved globally based on a single set of clinical trials, and all subsequent manufacturing changes are already carefully monitored by regulatory authorities, comparative pharmacokinetic testing of EU and US reference products is unnecessary. Manufacturers and regulators could take greater advantage of existing real-world evidence. Streamlining biosimilar development would enable biosimilar development of more and a wider variety of biological drugs, accelerating biosimilar development without impacting patient safety or effectiveness.

Analytical sameness methodology for the evaluation of structural, physicochemical, and biological characteristics of Armlupeg: A pegfilgrastim biosimilar case study

Pegfilgrastim is administered as an adjunct to chemotherapy to reduce the incidence of febrile neutropenia and associated infectious complications. Lupin's Pegfilgrastim is a proposed biosimilar to the U.S.-referenced Neulasta®. Demonstration of biosimilarity requires extensive physicochemical and functional characterization of the biosimilar, and demonstration of analytical similarity to the reference product, in addition to clinical studies. This work is a case study for demonstrating the analytical similarity of Armlupeg (Lupin's Pegfilgrastim) to Neulasta® with respect to structural and physicochemical attributes using several robust, orthogonal, and state-of-the-art techniques including high-end liquid chromatography, mass spectrometry, and spectroscopy techniques; circular dichroism; differential scanning calorimetry; nuclear magnetic resonance; analytical ultracentrifugation; and micro-flow imaging. Functional similarity was demonstrated using an in vitro cell proliferation assay to measure relative potency and surface plasmon resonance to measure receptor binding kinetics. Furthermore, comparative forced-degradation studies were performed to study the degradation of the products under stress conditions. The product attributes were ranked based on a critical quality attributes risk score according to their potential clinical impact. Based on criticality, all analyses were statistically evaluated to conclude analytical similarity. Lupin's Pegfilgrastim was comparable to Neulasta® as demonstrated via structural, functional, and purity analyses. Lupin's Pegfilgrastim complied with the quality and statistical ranges established using Neulasta®. Both products follow the same degradation pathways under stress conditions as observed in the forced-degradation studies. No new impurity or degradation product was observed in Lupin's Pegfilgrastim. These data conclusively demonstrate the analytical similarity of Lupin's Pegfilgrastim and Neulasta®.

The landscape of biosimilars in Saudi Arabia: preparing for the next decade

INTRODUCTION

The government of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) has developed a well-defined strategy to restructure the health sector and operate on value-based principles. Biosimilars are a viable option for increasing accessibility while lowering health-care costs.

AREAS COVERED

We describe the current and future biosimilar landscape in KSA. We discuss the growth of the biosimilar market, the regulatory approval process, biosimilar adoption, and the potential impact on health-care systems and patient outcomes.

EXPERT OPINION

The biosimilar market in KSA is expanding and expected to continue this trajectory in the coming decade. The growth of the market is influenced by the KSA health transformation initiative, the well-defined regulatory framework for biosimilars set by the Saudi Food and Drug Authority (SFDA), and the adoption of biosimilars by health-care providers. Overall, the biosimilar regulation is evolving and the future of biosimilars looks promising in KSA. Biosimilars offer a more cost-effective alternative, which can help to expand access to more treatment options for patients and contribute to cost saving for the health-care system.

Outcomes Following Adalimumab Bio-originator to Biosimilar Switch-A Comparison Using Real-world Patient- and Physician-Reported Data in European Countries

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this work is to compare real-world outcomes of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) receiving adalimumab (ADA) bio-originator (non-switchers) to those who had switched from ADA bio-originator to an ADA biosimilar (switchers) on the basis of the hypothesis that these outcomes would differ.

METHODS

Data were drawn from the Adelphi RA Disease Specific Programme™, a point-in-time survey of physicians and their patients in Europe (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, UK) in 2020. Physicians completed a questionnaire for their next ten adult patients with RA, followed by four additional patients who had switched from ADA bio-originator to an ADA biosimilar (switchers). Physician- and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for switchers and non-switchers were compared by propensity score matching.

RESULTS

Three hundred and three rheumatologists provided data for 160 non-switchers and 225 switchers, 140 patients provided data; 51 non-switchers, 89 switchers. According to physician-reported disease activity, non-switchers were more likely to improve on their current ADA treatment than switchers (68%, n = 108 vs. 26%, n = 59 p < 0.001) and less likely to worsen (1%, n = 2 vs. 9%, n = 20; p < 0.01). Physician-reported patient adherence was significantly lower amongst switchers versus non-switchers (0.66 vs. 0.78, respectively; p = 0.04). More non-switchers than switchers were reported by their physicians to be consistent in taking their RA medicine (p < 0.001). Compared with non-switchers, PRO measures indicated quality of life was worse (EQ-5D Visual Analogue Scale: 62.9 vs. 71.9; p < 0.001) and activity impairment was greater (Work Productivity Activity Index: 31.0 vs. 24.4; p = 0.02) for switchers, with trends for poorer health status and greater pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Non-medical switching in RA treatment may lead to unforeseen outcomes that should be considered by health decision-makers.

Extracellular Vesicles as Drug Delivery Systems in Organ Transplantation: The Next Frontier

Extracellular vesicles are lipid bilayer-delimited nanoparticles excreted into the extracellular space by all cells. They carry a cargo rich in proteins, lipids and DNA, as well as a full complement of RNA species, which they deliver to recipient cells to induce downstream signalling, and they play a key role in many physiological and pathological processes. There is evidence that native and hybrid EVs may be used as effective drug delivery systems, with their intrinsic ability to protect and deliver a functional cargo by utilising endogenous cellular mechanisms making them attractive as therapeutics. Organ transplantation is the gold standard for treatment for suitable patients with end-stage organ failure. However, significant challenges still remain in organ transplantation; prevention of graft rejection requires heavy immunosuppression and the lack of donor organs results in a failure to meet demand, as manifested by growing waiting lists. Pre-clinical studies have demonstrated the ability of EVs to prevent rejection in transplantation and mitigate ischemia reperfusion injury in several disease models. The findings of this work have made clinical translation of EVs possible, with several clinical trials actively recruiting patients. However, there is much to be uncovered, and it is essential to understand the mechanisms behind the therapeutic benefits of EVs. Machine perfusion of isolated organs provides an unparalleled platform for the investigation of EV biology and the testing of the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of EVs. This review classifies EVs and their biogenesis routes, and discusses the isolation and characterisation methods adopted by the international EV research community, before delving into what is known about EVs as drug delivery systems and why organ transplantation represents an ideal platform for their development as drug delivery systems.

Consistency of Product Quality for SB5, an Adalimumab Biosimilar

BACKGROUND

Biologics, regardless of whether they are biosimilars or reference products, are inherently variable due to their size, complexity, and the manufacturing process involved to produce them. Since a drift or evolution of quality attributes of a biologic may impact its clinical safety or efficacy, it is critical for the manufacturer to carefully control the manufacturing process and monitor the quality attributes of a biologic.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to demonstrate that the quality profile of the SB5 drug product has been consistent over its production history from 2013 to 2022. SB5 is a biosimilar referencing adalimumab (Humira, trademark of AbbVie Biotechnology Ltd) and SB5 has been approved by 14 regulatory authorities including the European Commission in August 2017 (brand name Imraldi™) and the US Food and Drug Administration in July 2019 (brand name Hadlima™).

METHODS

A total of 93 SB5 drug product batches manufactured between 2013 and 2022 were analyzed for a series of release parameters to evaluate the consistency in their critical quality attributes including purity, charge variants, and functional activities (TNF-α binding activity and TNF-α neutralizing potency).

RESULTS

The purity, charge variants, and functional activities of all batches were consistent over time and within the stringent acceptance criteria defined by regulatory agencies to ensure the safety and efficacy of SB5.

CONCLUSION

The data presented in this study provide evidence that the quality of SB5 has remained consistent and tightly controlled even through process changes such as manufacturing site transfers and change in formulation.

Monoclonal antibodies in breast cancer: A critical appraisal

In breast cancer, mAbs can play multifunctional roles like targeting cancer cells, sometimes directly attacking them, helping in locating and delivering therapeutic drugs to targets, inhibiting cell growth and blocking immune system inhibitors, etc. Monoclonal antibodies are also one of the important successful treatment strategies especially against HER2 but they have not been explored much for other types of breast cancers especially in triple negative breast cancers. Monoclonal antibodies impact the feasibility of antigen specificity, bispecific and trispecific mAbs have opened new doors for more targeted specific efficacy. Monoclonal antibodies can be used diversly and with efficacy as compared to other methods of treatment thus maining it a suitable candidate for breast cancer treatment. However, mAbs treatment also causes various side effects such as fever, trembling, fatigue, headache and muscle pain, nausea/vomiting, difficulty in breathing, rashes and bleeding. Understanding the pros and cons of this strategy, we have explored in this review, the current and future potential capabilities of monoclonal antibodies with respect to diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer. DATA AVAILABILITY: Not applicable.

Indian Biosimilars and Vaccines at Crossroads-Replicating the Success of Pharmagenerics

BACKGROUND

The global pharma sector is fast shifting from generics to biologics and biosimilars with the first approval in Europe in 2006 followed by US approval in 2015. In the form of Hepatitis B vaccine, India saw its first recombinant biologics approval in 2000. Around 20% of generic medications and 62% of vaccines are now supplied by the Indian pharmaceutical industry. It is this good position in biologics and biosimilars production that could potentially improve healthcare via decreased treatment cost. India has witnessed large investments in biosimilars over the years. Numerous India-bred new players, e.g., Enzene Biosciences Ltd., are keen on biosimilars and have joined the race alongside the emerging giants, e.g., Biocon and Dr. Reddy's. A very positive sign was the remarkable disposition during the COVID-19 pandemic by Bharat Biotech and the Serum Institute of India. India's biopharmaceutical industry has been instrumental in producing and supplying preventives and therapeutics to fight COVID-19. Despite a weak supply chain and workforce pressure, the production was augmented to provide reasonably priced high-quality medications to more than 133 nations. Biosimilars could cost-effectively treat chronic diseases involving expensive conventional therapies, including diabetes, respiratory ailments, cancer, and connective tissue diseases. Biologics and biosimilars have been and are being tested to treat and manage COVID-19 symptoms characterized by inflammation and respiratory distress.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Although India boasts many universities, research centers, and a relatively skilled workforce, its global University-Industry collaboration ranking is 24, IPR ranking remains 47 and innovation ranking 39. This reveals a wide industry-academia gap to bridge. There are gaps in effective translational research in India that must be promptly and appropriately addressed. Innovation demands strong and effective collaborations among universities, techno-incubators, and industries.

METHODOLOGY

Many successful research findings in academia do not get translation opportunities supposedly due to low industrial collaboration, low IP knowledge, and publication pressure with stringent timelines. In light of this, a detailed review of literature, including policy papers, government initiatives, and corporate reviews, was carried out, and the compilation and synthesis of the secondary data were meticulously summarized for the easy comprehension of the facts and roadmap ahead. For easy comprehension, charts, figures, and compiled tables are presented.

RESULTS

This review assesses India's situation in the biosimilar space, the gaps and areas to improve for Indian investment strategies, development, and innovation, addressing need for a more skilled workforce, industrial collaboration, and business models.

CONCLUSIONS

This review also proposes forward an approach to empowering technopreneurs to develop MSMEs for large-scale operations to support India in taking innovative thoughts to the global level to ultimately realize a self-reliant India. The limitations of the compilation are also highlighted towards the end.

The Sincerest Form of Flattery? Biosimilars in Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Biosimilar medications have the potential to significantly reduce the cost of treatment in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Observational studies have shown similar efficacy and safety of biosimilars to biologic reference products. Shared decision-making is crucial to the successful implementation of these agents.

Alternative Excipients for Protein Stabilization in Protein Therapeutics: Overcoming the Limitations of Polysorbates

Given their safety and efficiency in protecting protein integrity, polysorbates (PSs) have been the most widely used excipients for the stabilization of protein therapeutics for years. In recent decades, however, there have been numerous reports about visible or sub-visible particles in PS-containing biotherapeutic products, which is a major quality concern for parenteral drugs. Alternative excipients that are safe for parenteral administration, efficient in protecting different protein drugs against various stress conditions, effective in protein stabilization in high-concentrated liquid formulations, stable under the storage conditions for the duration of the product's shelf-life, and compatible with other formulation components and the primary packaging are highly sought after. The aim of this paper is to review potential alternative excipients from different families, including surfactants, carbohydrate- and amino acid-based excipients, synthetic amphiphilic polymers, and ionic liquids that enable protein stabilization. For each category, important characteristics such as the ability to stabilize proteins against thermal and mechanical stresses, current knowledge related to the safety profile for parenteral administration, potential interactions with other formulation components, and primary packaging are debated. Based on the provided information and the detailed discussion thereof, this paper may pave the way for the identification or development of efficient excipients for biotherapeutic protein stabilization.

Biosimilars: Science, Implications, and Potential Outlooks in the Middle East and Africa

Biosimilars are biological products that efficiently replicate the function of the originator products. They have changed the prognosis of millions of patients with many serious conditions. The main engine beyond their development is to bring competition into the marketplace, accordingly further the healthcare systems' sustainability. Furthermore, by lowering financial obstacles to biological treatments, biosimilars play a critical role in budgetary redistribution and, hence, promote better allocation of scarce healthcare resources. Today, biosimilars have become a substantial component of effective biological therapies anywhere in the world. Alike, most Middle East and African countries are encouraging the domestic biosimilars industry, and the whole region is aware of the biosimilars' importance. However, constraints to increasing biosimilars uptake should be addressed.

No two classes of biosimilars: Urgent advice to the US Congress and the FDA

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

The United States is the only country with legislation to approve two classes of biosimilars. One has "no clinically meaningful difference" from the reference product, and when it is tested for switching and alternating, it can receive an interchangeable status. The objective of this review is to establish whether it is possible from the switching and alternating studies to evaluate additional safety or efficacy.

METHODS

Analysed published data to ascertain if the testing with switching and alternating provide additional proof of safety or efficacy. Political and scientific rationale of creating a new class of biosimilars and how this affects the confidence in biosimilars.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

There is no safety or efficacy concern when switching or alternating biosimilars with the reference product. Unfortunately, the rationale for interchangeability is more political than scientific, and it has brought more confusion and mistrust in using biosimilars in the United States.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

The US Congress is requested to remove the interchangeability clause from the Biological Price and Competition Act to enable faster acceptance of biosimilars and remove the threat of lack of confidence in the safety of biosimilars.

Under the Umbrella of Clinical Pharmacology: Inflammatory Bowel Disease, Infliximab and Adalimumab, and a Bridge to an Era of Biosimilars

Monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) have revolutionized the treatment of many chronic inflammatory diseases, including inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). IBD is a term that comprises two quite similar, yet distinctive, disorders-Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC). Two blockbuster MAbs, infliximab (IFX) and adalimumab (ADL), transformed the pharmacological approach of treating CD and UC. However, due to the complex interplay of pharmacology and immunology, MAbs face challenges related to their immunogenicity, effectiveness, and safety. To ease the burden of IBD and other severe diseases, biosimilars have emerged as a cost-effective alternative to an originator product. According to the current knowledge, biosimilars of IFX and ADL in IBD patients are shown to be as safe and effective as their originators. The future of biosimilars, in general, is promising due to the potential of making the health care system more sustainable. However, their use is accompanied by misconceptions regarding their effectiveness and safety, as well as by controversy regarding their interchangeability. Hence, until a scientific consensus is achieved, scientific data on the long-term effectiveness and safety of biosimilars are needed.

A review of the totality of evidence in the development of ABP 798, a rituximab biosimilar

ABP 798 (RIABNI™) is a biosimilar to rituximab reference product (RP), a monoclonal antibody that targets CD20. Approval of ABP 798 was based on the totality of evidence generated using a stepwise approach which began by showing that it is structurally and functionally similar to rituximab RP. This analytical assessment was followed by a demonstration of pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic similarity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Comparative clinical efficacy and safety of ABP 798 with rituximab RP was demonstrated as a final step in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma and in those with rheumatoid arthritis. Overall, the totality of evidence supported the conclusion that ABP 798 is highly similar to rituximab RP and provided scientific justification for extrapolation to other approved indications of rituximab RP.

A New Human Platelet Lysate for Mesenchymal Stem Cell Production Compliant with Good Manufacturing Practice Conditions Preserves the Chemical Characteristics and Biological Activity of Lyo-Secretome Isolated by Ultrafiltration

Recently, we proposed a Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP)-compliant production process for freeze-dried mesenchymal stem cell (MSC)-secretome (lyo-secretome): after serum starvation, the cell supernatant was collected, and the secretome was concentrated by ultrafiltration and freeze-dried, obtaining a standardized ready-to-use and stable powder. In this work, we modified the type of human platelet lysate (HPL) used as an MSC culture supplement during the lyo-secretome production process: the aim was to verify whether this change had an impact on product quality and also whether this new procedure could be validated according to GMP, proving the process robustness. MSCs were cultured with two HPLs: the standard previously validated one (HPL-E) and the new one (HPL-S). From the same pool of platelets, two batches of HPL were obtained: HPL-E (by repeated freezing and thawing cycles) and HPL-S (by adding Ca-gluconate to form a clot and its subsequent mechanical wringing). Bone marrow MSCs from three donors were separately cultured with the two HPLs until the third passage and then employed to produce lyo-secretome. The following indicators were selected to evaluate the process performance: (i) the lyo-secretome quantitative composition (in lipids and proteins), (ii) the EVs size distribution, and (iii) anti-elastase and (iv) immunomodulant activity as potency tests. The new HPL supplementation for MSCs culture induced only a few minimal changes in protein/lipid content and EVs size distribution; despite this, it did not significantly influence biological activity. The donor intrinsic MSCs variability in secretome secretion instead strongly affected the quality of the finished product and could be mitigated by concentrating the final product to reach a determined protein (and lipid) concentration. In conclusion, the modification of the type of HPL in the MSCs culture during lyo-secretome production induces only minimal changes in the composition but not in the potency, and therefore, the new procedure can be validated according to GMP.

Report from the CVOT Summit 2021: new cardiovascular, renal, and glycemic outcomes

The 7th Cardiovascular Outcome Trial (CVOT) Summit on Cardiovascular, Renal, and Glycemic Outcomes, was held virtually on November 18-19, 2021. Pursuing the tradition of the previous summits, this reference congress served as a platform for in-depth discussion and exchange on recently completed CVOTs. This year's focus was placed on the outcomes of EMPEROR-Preserved, FIGARO-DKD, AMPLITUDE-O, SURPASS 1-5, and STEP 1-5. Trial implications for diabetes and obesity management and the impact on new treatment algorithms were highlighted for endocrinologists, diabetologists, cardiologists, nephrologists, and general practitioners. Discussions evolved from outcome trials using SGLT2 inhibitors as therapy for heart failure, to CVOTs with nonsteroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists and GLP-1 receptor agonists. Furthermore, trials for glycemic and overweight/obesity management, challenges in diabetes management in COVID-19, and novel guidelines and treatment strategies were discussed.Trial registration The 8th Cardiovascular Outcome Trial Summit will be held virtually on November 10-11, 2022 ( http://www.cvot.org ).

A Reference Standard for Analytical Testing of Erythropoietin

Purpose

Erythropoietin (EPO) is a 165 amino acid protein that promotes the proliferation of erythrocytic progenitors. A decrease in endogenous EPO production causes anemia that can be treated with recombinant Human EPO (rHuEPO).

Objective

To ensure the safety and efficacy of the rHuEPO, manufacturers must use analytical methods to demonstrate similarity across batches and between different products. To do this they need reference standards to validate their equipment and methods.

Method

We used peptide mapping, size-exclusion chromatography, glycoprofiling, and isoelectric focusing to analyze a rHuEPO reference standard.

Results

Characterization demonstrates that our rHuEPO reference standard meets the criteria for quality.

Conclusion

The rHuEPO reference standard is fit for purpose as a tool for validating system suitability and methods.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11095-022-03213-1.

An Introduction to Biosimilars for the Treatment of Retinal Diseases: A Narrative Review

Biological therapies have revolutionized the treatment of disease across a number of therapeutic areas including retinal diseases. However, on occasion, such treatments may be relatively more expensive compared to small molecule therapies. This can restrict patient access and treatment length leading to suboptimal clinical outcomes. Several biosimilar candidates of ranibizumab and aflibercept are currently in development and the first biosimilar of ranibizumab received EMA approval in August and FDA approval in September 2021. Biosimilars are biological medicines that are highly similar to an already-approved biological medicine (reference product). The physicochemical and clinical similarity of a biosimilar is determined by a rigorous analytical and clinical program, including extensive pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analysis with phase III equivalence studies where appropriate. These phase III studies are carried out in a patient population that is representative of all of the potential approved therapeutic indications of the originator product and the most sensitive for detecting potential differences between the biosimilar and the reference product. Biosimilars have been used successfully across a wide range of therapeutic areas for the past 15 years where they have achieved substantial cost savings that can be reinvested into healthcare systems without affecting the quality of patient care. The current review provides an introduction to biosimilars with the aim of preparing retinal specialists for discussing these products with their patients.

Trastuzumab in breast cancer treatment: the Era of biosimilars

BACKGROUND

The discovery of trastuzumab as anti-HER2 therapy markedly improved disease control and the survival rates of patients with HER2+ breast cancer. However, as trastuzumab is considered a complex molecule, the cost of production is usually elevated, which significantly affects health budgets and limits the treatment access for patients who live in underdeveloped countries. Recently, trastuzumab production became more accessible and sustainable due to the patents' expiration, allowing biosimilar versions of trastuzumab to be developed.

OBJECTIVE

Our main goal was to shed more light on the uses of biosimilars in breast cancer treatment, emphasizing trastuzumab.

METHOD

An integrative review was carried out in the PubMed, Scielo, Web of Science, and SCOPUS databases using the terms "biosimilar," "breast cancer," "monoclonal antibody," and "trastuzumab." The time range included scientific articles published from 2015 to 2021.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The bibliographic survey showed the complexities in biological medicine manufacturing and how the monoclonal antibody's therapy with trastuzumab improved the patients' life expectancy, revolutionizing HER2+ breast cancer treatment. Nonetheless, despite its benefits, trastuzumab generates certain restrictions, especially from the economic perspective. Trastuzumab biosimilars have high selectivity and rarely cause adverse effects compared to conventional chemotherapy.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that trastuzumab biosimilars improve patients' accessibility to breast cancer treatment through a safe and effective therapy compared to the drug reference.

Interchangeability of biosimilars: A study of expert views and visions regarding the science and substitution

Healthcare systems have reached a critical point regarding the question of whether biosimilar substitution should become common practice. To move the discussion forward, the study objective was to investigate the views of experts from medicines agencies and the pharmaceutical industry on the science underpinning interchangeability of biosimilars. We conducted an empirical qualitative study using semi-structured interviews informed by a cross-disciplinary approach encompassing regulatory science, law, and pharmaceutical policy. In total 25 individuals with experience within biologics participated during September 2018-August 2019. Eight participants were EU national medicines authority regulators, and 17 had pharmaceutical industry background: five from two originator-only companies, four from two companies with both biosimilar and originator products, and eight from seven biosimilar-only companies. Two analysts independently conducted inductive content analysis, resulting in data-driven themes capturing the meaning of the data. The participants reported that interchangeability was more than a scientific question of likeness between biosimilar and reference products: it also pertained to regulatory practices and trust. Participants were overall confident in the science behind exchanging biosimilar products for the reference products via switching, i.e., with physician involvement. However, their opinions differed regarding the scientific risk associated with biosimilar substitution, i.e., without physician involvement. Almost all participants saw no need for additional scientific data to support substitution. Moreover, the participants did not believe that switching studies, as required in the US, were appropriate for obtaining scientific certainty due to their small size. It is unclear why biosimilar switching is viewed as scientifically safer than substitution; therefore, we expect greater policy debate on biosimilar substitution in the near future. We urge European and UK policymakers and regulators to clarify their visions for biosimilar substitution; the positions of these two frontrunners are likely to influence other jurisdictions on the future of biosimilar use.

Quality similarity-driven development of biosimilar monoclonal antibodies

The number of approved and marketed biosimilar monoclonal antibodies has been increasing steeply in recent years in regulated markets. In contrast to small molecular generic drugs, structure and variant profile of biosimilar mAbs are not identical with those of the reference medicinal product. Biosimilarity is proven by using the "totality of evidence" approach, and it forms the basis of the approval process of biosimilars in regulated markets. This process includes a comprehensive quality similarity exercise. This step involves the evaluation of all physico-chemical and biological-functional characteristics. The present paper evaluates the analytical similarity approaches taken through the evaluation of quality attributes of recently approved biosimilar mAbs.

Oxidation and Deamidation of Monoclonal Antibody Products: Potential Impact on Stability, Biological Activity, and Efficacy

The role in human health of therapeutic proteins in general, and monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) in particular, has been significant and is continuously evolving. A considerable amount of time and resources are invested first in mAb product development and then in clinical examination of the product. Physical and chemical degradation can occur during manufacturing, processing, storage, handling, and administration. Therapeutic proteins may undergo various chemical degradation processes, including oxidation, deamidation, isomerization, hydrolysis, deglycosylation, racemization, disulfide bond breakage and formation, Maillard reaction, and β-elimination. Oxidation and deamidation are the most common chemical degradation processes of mAbs, which may result in changes in physical properties, such as hydrophobicity, charge, secondary or/and tertiary structure, and may lower the thermodynamic or kinetic barrier to unfold. This may predispose the product to aggregation and other chemical modifications, which can alter the binding affinity, half-life, and efficacy of the product. This review summarizes major findings from the past decade on the impact of oxidation and deamidation on the stability, biological activity, and efficacy of mAb products. Mechanisms of action, influencing factors, characterization tools, clinical impact, and risk mitigation strategies have been addressed.

Adipose-derived stem cell secretome as a cell-free product for cutaneous wound healing

Chronic wounds continue to be a substantial public health concern contributing to both humanistic and economic burden worldwide. The magnitude of chronic wounds as a global healthcare crisis is likely to increase due to the rising geriatric and diabetic population, demanding novel therapeutic approaches that can restore the functionality of the skin at a reduced cost. Stem cell therapy has been widely acknowledged as a promising strategy for the repair of damaged tissues due to its regenerative potential. This potential attributes to a concoction of bioactive molecules secreted by the stem cells, collectively called the secretome, that mediates paracrine and autocrine functions. Among the stem cell types, adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal stem cells (ADMSCs) have been receiving increased attention for its ease of isolation, abundance in tissue and notable impact on improving chronic wound healing. Owing to the reported advantages of cell-free preparations like the secretome over cellular products, developing secretome as a ready-to-use product for wound healing applications seems promising. In this review, we discuss the functional benefits of adipose stem cell secretome in wound healing, the techniques to enrich the secretome and the recommendations for the scale-up and commercialization of secretome products.

Challenges Faced by the Biopharmaceutical Industry in the Development and Marketing Authorization of Biosimilar Medicines in BRICS-TM Countries: An Exploratory Study

BACKGROUND

Biosimilars are expected to emerge as a rapidly growing segment of the biopharmaceutical industry. However, the biosimilar industry faces multiple challenges and obstacles in developing and marketing these complex products. Divergent regulatory framework in emerging countries adds to repetitive trials and increased cost of biosimilar development, delaying the approval process. Due to such roadblocks, healthcare systems and patients are yet to realize the full benefits of biosimilars.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this exploratory study was to specifically identify the challenges faced by the industry in emerging countries including Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Turkey and Mexico (BRICS-TM), pertaining to biosimilar development and the regulatory approval process. In particular, this study aims to understand the perceptions of industry on the barriers faced by them in terms of complexity, costs for biosimilar development and time-to-market for biosimilar product.

METHODS

A semi-quantitative questionnaire was designed based on secondary research. A total of 93 industry personnel and representatives from 14 trade associations from the BRICS-TM countries with 15-year minimum experience were identified and invited to take part in the study and participate in interviews, which were recorded verbatim. Data processing and analysis was carried out; descriptive statistics were used for quantitative data and content analysis was employed to generate themes for qualitative data.

RESULTS

Of the 107 biopharmaceutical industry and trade association representatives invited to participate in the study, respondents from 33 biopharmaceutical companies agreed to take part and underwent the interviews. The industry personnel perceived biosimilar guidelines and approval processes as being protracted and in a state of evolution. The absence of an abridged approval pathway limited effectiveness of the regulatory process. The biggest hurdles in the development of biosimilar dossiers were the sourcing of the reference biological product and expectations around confirmatory clinical trials by the agencies. The non-comprehensive implementation of a stepwise approach resulting in unnecessary toxicity studies was also reported as a major challenge. The authors recommend further primary research with BRICS-TM regulatory agencies in order to propose a simplified pathway for development and approval.

CONCLUSIONS

Lack of standardized biosimilar development criteria and regulatory convergence across BRICS-TM agencies has led to challenges in multi-country development programmes for these medicines, in turn impacting the ability of industry to launch newer and more affordable biosimilars.

OBSIDIAn - real world evidence of Originator to BioSImilar Drug switch in juvenile idiopathic arthritis

OBJECTIVES

Limited data about use of biosimilars are available in children with Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis (JIA). This study therefore aimed to evaluate long-term efficacy and safety of switching from etanercept (ETA) and adalimumab (ADA) originators to their biosimilars, in children with JIA, in a real-world setting.

METHODS

This is a retro-prospective non-interventional multicentre Italian comparative cohort study. Medical charts of JIA children treated with biosimilars of ETA or ADA were included. Efficacy and safety of TNF-inhibitors therapy was evaluated at last follow-up during originator and at 3, 6 and 12 months following the switch to biosimilar.

RESULTS

59 children (42 female, median age at onset 88 months) were treated with biosimilar of ETA (21) and ADA (38). Forty-five switched from the originator to the BIO (17 ETA, 28 ADA). At time of switch, 12/17 patients on ETA and 18/28 on ADA were in remission. No significant difference has been found at 3, 6 and 12 months after the switch. Ten patients discontinued biosimilars due to disease remission (4 ETA, 3 ADA), family willing (1 ETA), occurrence of burning at injection site (1 ETA), and persistent activity (1 ADA). No statistically significant difference was observed between originator and BIOs, nor between originator and BIOs, and between ADA and ETA in time to disease remission achievement, time to relapse and number of patients who experienced AE.

CONCLUSION

Our real-life results seem to confirm the efficacy and safety profile of switching from originator of ADA and ETA to their respective BIOs also in paediatric patients with JIA.

Extracellular vesicles as a next-generation drug delivery platform

Extracellular-vesicle-based cell-to-cell communication is conserved across all kingdoms of life. There is compelling evidence that extracellular vesicles are involved in major (patho)physiological processes, including cellular homoeostasis, infection propagation, cancer development and cardiovascular diseases. Various studies suggest that extracellular vesicles have several advantages over conventional synthetic carriers, opening new frontiers for modern drug delivery. Despite extensive research, clinical translation of extracellular-vesicle-based therapies remains challenging. Here, we discuss the uniqueness of extracellular vesicles along with critical design and development steps required to utilize their full potential as drug carriers, including loading methods, in-depth characterization and large-scale manufacturing. We compare the prospects of extracellular vesicles with those of the well established liposomes and provide guidelines to direct the process of developing vesicle-based drug delivery systems.

Biosimilars accessible in the market for the treatment of cancer

Biosimilars are the biological product clinically identical to a biologic reference standard regarding their strength, purity, and safety. A large segment of biosimilars has been developed for the treatment of cancer. This review aims to discuss various facets of biosimilars and explicates on biosimilars accessible in the market for cancer clinical intervention. It also illustrates the outcomes of recent clinical trial studies concerning biosimilars. Further, it also crosstalk the safety profiles, regulatory approval requirements, and allied challenges therein. The work will be of significant interest to researchers working in the field of biologics and biosimilars.