May 23, 2012

FDA Issues Long-Awaited Draft Guidance Documents on Biosimilars

Ever since the health care reform law was enacted almost two years ago, the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries have been awaiting the FDA’s release of Guidance documents to describe the “biosimilars pathway,” i.e., the process for bringing to market alternative versions of biologic medicines a/k/a “biosimilars” or “follow-on biologics.” The health care reform law included the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (BPCIA) which established the statutory framework for the biosimilars pathway but delegated the regulatory process to the FDA. The initial wait at least is now over as the FDA recently issued three draft Guidance documents titled, Scientific Considerations in Demonstrating Biosimilarity to a Reference Product, Quality Considerations in Demonstrating Biosimilarity to a Reference Protein Product, and, Biosimilars: Questions and Answers Regarding Implementation of the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009, respectively.

In the Scientific Considerations Guidance, the FDA emphasized three key aspects of its approach to approving proposed biosimilars. First, the FDA stated that it will “consider the totality of the evidence provided by a sponsor to support a demonstration of biosimilarity” (FDA’s emphasis). Second, the FDA “recommends that sponsors use a stepwise approach in their development of biosimilar products.” Finally, the FDA suggested that the applicant for approval of a biosimilar product meet with FDA at practically every step of the way to discuss the results of the prior step and requirements and goals for the next steps. Although the process for approval may vary on a product-by-product basis, the Scientific Considerations Guidance discusses the following steps in some detail:

  • Structural analysis
  • Functional analysis
  • Animal studies (including toxicity, PK and PD, and immunogenicity)
  • Human clinical studies (including pharmacology, immunogenicity, safety and effectiveness, and extrapolation of data across indications)

The Scientific Considerations Guidance states that post-marketing safety monitoring “is an important component in ensuring the safety and effectiveness of biological products.”

In the Quality Considerations Guidance, the FDA sets forth “recommendations to applicants on the scientific and technical information of the chemistry, manufacturing, and controls (CMC) section of a marketing application for a proposed biosimilar product….” In assessing whether a proposed biosimilar product and a reference product are “highly similar,” as required for approval, this Guidance discusses the following “factors for consideration:”

  • Expression system
  • Manufacturing process
  • Assessment of physicochemical properties
  • Functional activities
  • Receptor binding and immunochemical properties
  • Impurities
  • Reference product and reference standards
  • Finished drug product
  • Stability

Finally, the Biosimilars: Q&A Guidance “provides answers to common questions from sponsors interested in developing proposed biosimilar products, biologics license application (BLA) holders, and other interested parties regarding FDA’s interpretation of the” BPCIA. It addresses such basic questions as who at FDA to contact with questions and when to ask for an initial meeting, to interpretive questions such as whether a biosimilar can be approved where it has a different formulation or delivery device than the reference product, or fewer routes of administration, fewer presentations, or fewer conditions of use than the reference product (yes to all), and several other questions as well.

The BPCIA recognized two levels of comparability between a proposed product and an existing reference product: “biosimilarity” and “interchangeability.” The determination that a follow-on biologic is “interchangeable” with a reference product means that a pharmacist can substitute one for the other without consulting the prescribing physician. The three Guidance documents do not address the process for obtaining a determination of interchangeability.

The initial reaction to the Guidance documents has been mixed. Some commentators have noted that the development process for biosimilars will be able to start “in the middle,” which is better than the beginning but not as close to the end as the starting point for generic drugs. The Guidance documents put patient safety in the forefront by acknowledging the increased complexity of biologic medicines and their method of manufacture as compared to generic drugs. The lack of guidance on interchangeability has been criticized, as has the lack of detail on clinical trials.

© 2012 BARNES & THORNBURG LLP

About the Author

Of Counsel

Nicolette R. Hudson is of counsel in the Columbus office of Barnes & Thornburg, where she is a member of the firm’s Intellectual Property Department. Ms. Hudson focuses her practice on trademark and copyright prosecution, counseling and enforcement, as well as trademark, unfair competition and copyright litigation.

614-628-1417

About the Author

Of Counsel

Hae Park-Suk is of counsel in the Washington, D.C., office and a member of the Intellectual Property Department. Ms. Park-Suk counsels clients on the selection, adoption, availability, and proper use of trademarks. Her practice consists of searching and clearing trademarks, prosecuting domestic and international trademark applications, managing extensive foreign trademark portfolios, assisting clients in planning and structuring their worldwide trademark strategies, assisting clients in protecting and enforcing their trademarks in the U.S. and worldwide, coordinating intellectual...

202-408-6919

Contributors

Partner

Lynn C. Tyler is a partner and registered patent lawyer in the firm’s Intellectual Property Department. Mr. Tyler helps innovative companies secure and preserve their market position and competitive advantage by navigating their way through the FDA to the marketplace and enforcing their intellectual property rights, which often must be protected against imitators who seek to reap where they have not sown. He litigates intellectual property matters and represents clients at virtually all stages of the process, including pre-litigation counseling, alternative dispute resolution,...

317-231-7392

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.