Biosimilar and Follow-on Insulin: The Ins, Outs, and Interchangeability

Objective: To provide an overview of the differences between biosimilars and generics, and to summarize regulatory requirements and outstanding issues related to biosimilar insulins in the United States, including the issue of interchangeability. Data Sources: References were obtained using MEDLINE searches, the bibliographies of articles identified during the searches, review articles, and general Internet searches. Key words included the following: diabetes, insulin, biosimilar, regulatory, follow-on, and interchangeability. Study Selection and Data Extraction: Articles, studies, regulatory documents, and opinion pieces that addressed issues around biosimilar/follow-on insulins and interchangeability of insulins in people with diabetes were selected for inclusion in this narrative review. Data Synthesis: There is understandable interest in the potential for new copies of existing insulins-termed biosimilar insulins or follow-on insulins-to reduce the substantial and growing costs associated with managing the diabetes epidemic and to improve access, as has been achieved with conventional generic drugs. However, biosimilars or follow-on insulins are not generics. There are critical differences between biologic products and conventional chemical drugs, which present specific challenges to manufacturers, regulators, and clinicians. Conclusions: Health care providers and payers need to be aware of the issues surrounding biosimilar and follow-on insulins as they become more widely available in the coming years. In particular, in the face of limited data on comparative safety and efficacy, careful consideration needs to be given when interchanging between originator and biosimilar drugs, when switching patients from one biosimilar drug to the other.

A GUIDE TO FOLLOW-ON BIOLOGICS AND BIOSIMILARS WITH A FOCUS ON INSULIN

OBJECTIVE

Many healthcare providers in the U.S. are not familiar with follow-on biologics and biosimilars nor with their critical distinctions from standard generics. Our aim is to provide a detailed review of both, with a focus on insulins in the U.S. regulatory system.

METHODS

Literature has been reviewed to provide information on various aspects of biosimilars and a follow-on biologic of insulin. This will include structure, efficacy, cost, switching, and legal issues.

RESULTS

Biologic products are large, complex molecules derived from living sources. Follow-on biologics are copies of the original innovator biologics. It is not possible to copy their structure exactly, leading to possible differences in efficacy and safety. Thus, regulations involving biologics are complex. Follow-on biologics are regulated under two Federal laws until March 23, 2020: the Public Health Service Act (PHS Act) and the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. Biosimilars are follow-on biologics which have been approved via the PHS Act. They consist of those which are "highly similar" to the reference drug and those which are "expected" to produce the same clinical result as the reference drug (interchangeable biosimilars). Interchangeable biosimilars have been determined by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to be substitutable by the pharmacist "without the intervention" of the prescriber. From the patient perspective, switching to a follow-on biologic may necessitate a change in delivery device, which may create issues for patient adherence and dosing.

CONCLUSION

Although they present several challenges in terms of regulation and acceptance, follow-on biologics have the potential to significantly reduce costs for patients requiring insulin therapy.

ABBREVIATIONS

BLA = biologics license application EU = European Union FDA = Food and Drug Administration FD&C = Food, Drug, and Cosmetic HCPCS = Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System INN = internatinal nonproprietary name NDA = new drug application PHS = Public Health Service.

Efficacy and safety of biosimilar insulins compared to their reference products: A systematic review

Importance

For nearly a century, no generic form of insulin has been available in the United States. However, the first biosimilar insulin, Basaglar, was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in 2015, and subsequently Admelog and Lusduna in 2017.

Objective

To summarize the scientific evidence comparing the safety, efficacy, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of biosimilar and reference insulin products.

Data sources

We conducted a systematic review using PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, Latin America and Caribbean Health Sciences, South Asian Database of Controlled Clinical Trials, and IndiaMED from their inception through January 14, 2018.

Study selection

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing safety, clinical efficacy, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of any biosimilar insulin with a reference product in adults regardless of sample size and location.

Data extraction and synthesis

Two researchers independently reviewed all titles, abstracts and text; extracted data; and performed quality assessments.

Main outcomes and measures

Efficacy, safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of biosimilar and reference insulin products

Results

Of 6945 articles screened, 11 studies were included in the data synthesis. LY2963016, Basalog, Basalin, and MK-1293 were compared to Lantus while SAR342434 was compared to Humalog. Three trials enrolled healthy volunteers, five enrolled type 1 diabetics, and two enrolled type 2 diabetics. One study enrolled both healthy and type 1 diabetics. Of the eleven studies, six examined pharmacokinetic and/or pharmacodynamic parameters and five examined clinical efficacy and immunogenicity. All studies included adverse events. All PK and/or PD studies showed that comparable parameters of biosimilar and reference products were within the pre-specified equivalence margins. Clinical studies suggested similar clinical efficacy and immunogenicity. Adverse events were similar between the groups across all studies.

Conclusions and relevance

Few published studies have compared biosimilar and reference insulins, though those that did suggest that the biosimilars have comparable safety and clinical efficacy as its reference product.

How Similar Are Biosimilars? What Do Clinicians Need to Know About Biosimilar and Follow-On Insulins?

IN BRIEF As more patents on biological medicines expire, increased numbers of biologic copies, referred to as "biosimilars," will likely become available in the United States in the coming years. With greater availability and the drive for health care savings, the use of biosimilars and of "follow-on" biological products is likely to increase in routine clinical practice. Health care practitioners need to be fully aware of these products and accompanying considerations if they are to make informed decisions together with their patients.

Administration of Biosimilar Insulin Analogs: Role of Devices

With the expiration of patent protection for several originator insulin analog molecules, the availability of insulin analog copies is set to increase. Many regulatory authorities have developed, and continue to refine, guidelines for the approval of biosimilar insulin analogs. Aspects such as the structure, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of biosimilar insulin analogs are extensively addressed in these guidelines, but how the biosimilar insulin analog is administered to people with diabetes is not usually a topic. The aim of this article is to highlight that the delivery device-drug combination is of particular importance. Regulatory, legal, and practical aspects of the delivery device, be it a syringe, pen, or pump, have to be considered in the context of biosimilar insulin analogs. Although the safety and efficacy of biosimilar insulin analogs per se are of primary importance for physicians and people with diabetes, functions and features of the devices used for administration also require attention from a practical point of view. Unfortunately, although there are several clinical studies investigating the technical aspects of and patient preference for the originator insulin analog pens, there are currently very little published data for nonoriginator or biosimilar insulin analog pens. In addition, it is not known if it is safe to assume that a biosimilar insulin analog cartridge is compatible with an existing originator insulin analog pen. We believe that there is a need for more discussion on the role of devices for administration of biosimilar insulin analogs.

Biosimilar insulins: guidance for data interpretation by clinicians and users

Biosimilar insulins are approved copies of insulins outside patent protection. Advantages may include greater market competition and potential cost reduction, but clinicians and users lack a clear perspective on 'biosimilarity' for insulins. The manufacturing processes for biosimilar insulins are manufacturer-specific and, although these are reviewed by regulators there are few public data available to allow independent assessment or review of issues such as intrinsic quality or batch-to-batch variation. Preclinical measures used to assess biosimilarity, such as tissue and cellular studies of metabolic activity, physico-chemical stability and animal studies of pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics and immunogenicity may be insufficiently sensitive to differences, and are often not formally published. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic studies (glucose clamps) with humans, although core assessments, have problems of precision which are relevant for accurate insulin dosing. Studies that assess clinical efficacy and safety and device compatibility are limited by current outcome measures, such as glycated haemoblobin levels and hypoglycaemia, which are insensitive to differences between insulins. To address these issues, we suggest that all comparative data are put in the public domain, and that systematic clinical studies are performed to address batch-to-batch variability, delivery devices, interchangeability in practice and long-term efficacy and safety. Despite these challenges biosimilar insulins are a welcome addition to diabetes therapy and, with a transparent approach, should provide useful benefit to insulin users.

Efficacy and safety of LY2963016 insulin glargine compared with insulin glargine (Lantus®) in patients with type 1 diabetes in a randomized controlled trial: the ELEMENT 1 study

AIMS

To compare the efficacy and safety of LY2963016 insulin glargine (LY IGlar) and the reference product (Lantus®) insulin glargine (IGlar) in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D).

METHODS

This phase III, randomized, open-label, 52-week study enrolled patients with T1D [glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) ≤11%] being treated with basal (once-daily) and bolus insulin. Patients were randomized to receive once-daily LY IGlar (n = 268) or IGlar (n = 267) in combination with mealtime insulin lispro for 52 weeks. The primary efficacy outcome was to test the non-inferiority (0.4% and then 0.3% margin) of LY IGlar to IGlar as measured by change in HbA1c from baseline to 24 weeks.

RESULTS

Both treatment groups had similar and significant (p < 0.001) within-group decreases in mean HbA1c values from baseline. LY IGlar met the non-inferiority criteria compared with IGlar for change in HbA1c from baseline to 24 weeks [-0.35 vs -0.46%, least-squares mean difference 0.108% (95% confidence interval -0.002 to 0.219), p > 0.05]. There were no significant (p > 0.05) treatment differences in other efficacy measures, including proportion of patients reaching HbA1c <7%, daily mean blood glucose, and insulin dose at 24 and 52 weeks. At 52 weeks, similar findings were observed between LY IGlar and IGlar for safety outcomes, including adverse events, allergic reactions, hypoglycaemia, weight change and insulin antibodies.

CONCLUSIONS

Both LY IGlar and IGlar, when used in combination with mealtime insulin lispro, provided effective and similar glucose control and similar safety profiles.

The biosimilar insulin landscape: current developments

Biosimilar insulins have the potential to increase access to treatment among patients with diabetes mellitus, reduce treatment costs, and expand market competition. The patents for several insulins are soon to expire, meaning there is room for copies of these products--or 'biosimilars'--to join the marketplace. It is vital that similar safety and efficacy to the innovator product is demonstrated for biosimilars. This presents many possible manufacturing and regulatory challenges. Complex manufacturing processes mean that even small differences between manufacturers can have a potential impact on the final product. Several companies are currently developing biosimilar insulins or are already producing these products in emerging markets with different regulatory requirements. For insulin biosimilars to be licensed in more established markets, manufacturers will need to meet the rigid criteria set out by agencies such as the European Medicines Agency and US Food and Drug Administration, and fulfill several pre-clinical, clinical, and pharmacovigilance surveillance criteria. As a result of differing regulatory requirements, there are possible gaps in the publically available clinical data to support the safety and efficacy of biosimilar insulins from around the world current as of July 2014. This review summarizes the current biosimilar insulin landscape.

Biosimilar insulins are coming: what they are, what you need to know

BACKGROUND

Many branded analog insulins will lose patent protection during the next few years. In response, a number of companies are developing biosimilar insulins, which have the potential to lower healthcare costs and increase patient access. Although these products are not yet available in the US, it is important that patients, payers and clinicians be aware of the potential benefits as well as concerns associated with biosimilar insulins.

SCOPE

This report provides information about these new products and discusses key questions clinicians should consider regarding biosimilar insulin.

CONCLUSION

The biosimilar insulins being developed have the potential to provide clinical benefits that are similar to current insulin analogs at a more affordable price, thereby allowing more patients greater access to these effective therapies. However, industry and regulatory agencies must proceed with caution in bringing these new insulins to market. Clinicians must be aware of how availability of these new medications may impact patients' adherence to their treatment regimens and begin taking steps now to address these potential issues.

Biosimilar insulins are coming: the top 10 things you should know

Biologic drugs, such as currently prescribed insulins, are large, complex, 3-dimensional molecules manufactured in biological systems. The complexity of the structure of the biologic drug and its manufacturing process means that it is challenging to create a biologic drug that is identical to the original branded drug. With the potential availability on the horizon of follow-on insulin products (also known as biosimilar insulins) in the United States and other countries where they are not currently in use, physicians (and other prescribers) need to be aware of the potential benefits and concerns regarding biosimilar insulins in order to facilitate informed decision making and to provide the best possible advice and guidance to their patients with diabetes. This article offers a brief, practical overview regarding biosimilar insulins by answering 10 key questions about the topic.

Biosimilars: Implications for health-system pharmacists

PURPOSE

An update on scientific and regulatory challenges in the rapidly evolving field of biosimilar product development is presented.

SUMMARY

The U.S. market for biosimilar products (i.e., highly similar "follow-on" versions of approved biological drugs) is expected to expand with establishment of an expedited-approval pathway for biosimilars similar to that implemented in European Union countries eight years ago. In 2012, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) published draft guidance clarifying the requirements of the biosimilars approval pathway; although no biosimilar has yet been approved via that pathway, FDA is engaged in ongoing meetings with a number of potential applicants. Due to molecular differences between innovator products and biosimilar versions, biosimilars are highly sensitive to manufacturing changes that can potentially have important safety and efficacy implications. Establishing the interchangeability of biosimilar and innovator drugs may be difficult at first, and it is possible that some biosimilars might not carry all the same indications for which the reference drug is approved. Pharmaceutical cost savings attained through the use of biosimilars are expected to average 20-30%. With several top-selling biologicals likely to lose patent exclusivity by 2020, health systems should prepare for the availability of new biosimilars by addressing formulary management and therapeutic interchange issues, pharmacovigilance and patient safety concerns, and related financial and operational issues.

CONCLUSION

Over the coming years, biosimilars will present opportunities for health care organizations to manage the growth of pharmaceutical expenditures. Pharmacists can play a key role in preparing health systems for projected rapid expansion in the use of biosimilars and associated medication-use policy challenges.

The emergence of biosimilar insulin preparations--a cause for concern?

Several biopharmaceuticals, including insulin and insulin analogs, are, or shortly will be, off-patent, thereby providing an opportunity for companies to attempt to manufacture "copies" commonly referred to as biosimilars and also known as follow-on biologics. Reassurance that such copy biologics are equally safe and effective as the conventional products is essential. It is important for the clinician to consider what information is therefore necessary for such assurances. Biopharmaceuticals, produced from living organisms and manufactured by complex processes, differ in many respects from chemically derived drugs. The biological source materials and manufacturing processes for non-innovator biologics may differ considerably from those used for producing the innovator substance. Differences between innovator and non-innovator products can be identified analytically (e.g., batch-to-batch consistency, product stability along side clinical safety). This provides a strong argument for caution before automatic substitution of conventional products (e.g., insulin by biosimilars). Several non-innovator insulins, including insulin analogs (while still patent-protected), are already available in many countries. Many of these lack rigorous regulations for biosimilar approval and pharmacovigilance. Recently an application for a biosimilar recombinant human insulin was withdrawn by the European Medicines Agency because of safety and efficacy concerns. Therefore, every biosimilar insulin and insulin analog should be assessed by well-defined globally harmonized preclinical and clinical studies followed by post-marketing pharmacovigilance programs, in the interest of people with diabetes worldwide.

Biosimilar insulins

Until now most insulin used in developed countries is manufactured and distributed by a small number of multinational companies. Other pharmaceutical companies - many of these are located in countries such as India or China - are also able to manufacture insulin with modern biotechnological methods. Additionally, the patents for many insulin formulations have expired or are going to expire soon. This enables such companies to produce insulins and to apply for market approval of these as biosimilar insulins (BIs) in highly regulated markets such as the EU or the US. To understand the complexity of BIs' approval and usage, scientific and regulatory aspects have to be discussed. Differences in the manufacturing process (none of the insulin-manufacturing procedures are identical) result in the fact that all insulin that might become BIs differ from the originator insulin to some extent. The question is, have such differences in the structure of the insulin molecule and or the purity and so on clinically relevant consequences for the biological effects induced or not. The guidelines already in place in the EU for market approval require that the manufacturer demonstrates that his insulin has a safety and efficacy profile that is similar to that of the 'original' insulin formulation. Recently guidelines for biosimilars were issued in the US; however, these do not cover insulin. Although a challenging approval process for insulins to become BI might be regarded as a hurdle to keep companies out of certain markets, it is fair to say that the potential safety and efficacy issues surrounding BI are substantial and relevant, and do warrant a careful and evidence-driven approval process. Nevertheless, it is very likely that in the next years, BIs will come to the market also in highly regulated markets.