February 26, 2021

Volume XI, Number 57


February 25, 2021

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

February 24, 2021

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

February 23, 2021

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

FDA Issues Guidance for Applicants Seeking Biosimilar/Interchangeable Approval

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released new draft guidance, Biosimilarity and Interchangeability: Additional Draft Q&As on Biosimilar Development and the BPCI Act, intended for prospective applicants of biologics license applications (BLAs) for biosimilar and interchangeable products, and for other parties interested in the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (BPCI Act). This new guidance aims to further facilitate the development of proposed biosimilar products and proposed interchangeable products.

The BPCI Act created an abbreviated licensure pathway for biological products shown to be biosimilar to, or interchangeable with, an FDA-licensed biological reference product. This newly released draft guidance is the third FDA question-and-answer guidance on the BPCI Act, with the previous two released in December 2018: Questions and Answers on Biosimilar Development and the BPCI Act Guidance for Industry and New and Revised Draft Q&As on Biosimilar Development and the BPCI Act (Revision 2).

With the new guidance, FDA added four more questions and answers for a total of 28 when combining past guidance documents. Below are summaries of the new Q&As:

Q25. How will FDA review applications for licensure as an interchangeable biosimilar where data supports biosimilarity but NOT interchangeability?

A. Applicants seeking licensure for an interchangeable biosimilar should affirmatively state that fact in their submission cover letter. Otherwise FDA will only review the application under the standards of a biosimilar product. When an applicant indicates a desire for interchangeability licensure, FDA will review as both an interchangeable biosimilar and also as a biosimilar. FDA will split the application and take separate actions on the product if it determines the application only supports licensing the product as a biosimilar and not an interchangeable. For example, FDA could approve the product as a biosimilar, but issue a complete response letter regarding interchangeability allowing the applicant the opportunity to supplement the interchangeable biosimilar submission. If an applicant only desires to seek interchangeability licensure, the cover letter should include “INTERCHANGEABLE-ONLY REVIEW” and FDA will only review the product as an interchangeable.

Q26. How should a BLA holder proceed if they want to seek licensure of their biologic as biosimilar/interchangeable with another BLA reference product?

A. BLA holders should proceed in similar fashion to any other applicant seeking licensure as a biosimilar/interchangeable. Specifically, BLA holders should submit an original application for licensure as a biosimilar and/or interchangeable product. It is not necessary to revoke the BLA in order to obtain designation as a biosimilar/interchangeable product.

Q27. Does FDA have any recommendations for labeling interchangeable biosimilars?

A. FDA defers to its prior guidance (Biosimilar Labeling Guidance) for interchangeable biosimilar products noting the labeling should include relevant data and information from the reference product supporting the safety and effectiveness of the reference product. The labeling should not include data supporting the interchangeability of the product. However, the FDA notes the recommendations described in sections IV through VII of the Biosimilar Labeling Guidance generally do apply to interchangeable products and will provide additional guidance as it gains experience with interchangeable biosimilars.

Q28. Does FDA recommend that labeling for an interchangeable product include a statement on interchangeability?

A. Yes. FDA recommends including a statement immediately beneath the Highlights of Prescribing Information that the product is interchangeable with the reference product. Interchangeable products should also have a footnote explaining the definition of an “interchangeable product.” FDA provides recommended language in the guidance.

This new draft guidance is open for public comment until January 19, 2021.


© 2020 Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP. All Rights Reserved.National Law Review, Volume X, Number 342



About this Author

Jessica Benson Cox Product Liability Litigation Attorney Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath Indianapolis, IN

Jessica Cox defends pharmaceutical companies, device manufacturers and other industry leaders involved in product liability litigation.

Product & Malpractice Litigator

Jessica is experienced with overseeing discovery and medical/expert issues in complex product liability cases, and she has served as national and local counsel in matters involving local anesthetics, anti-psychotic medications, cosmetics, cardiovascular and orthopedic medical devices.

She has represented physician groups and hospitals in medical malpractice actions brought before the Indiana...

Andrew M. McCoy Intellectual Property Litigation Attorney Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath Indianapolis, IN

Andrew McCoy helps clients grow and protect their intellectual property assets, with a particular focus on intellectual property litigation. He counsels a wide range of clients — from entrepreneurs to Fortune 100 companies — in acquiring, licensing and enforcing patents, trademarks, copyrights and trade secrets; providing due diligence and freedom to operate analysis and opinions; and all aspects of intellectual property litigation. Drew also provides strategic counsel to clients navigating post-grant proceedings, particularly inter partes review (IPR).

Drew has counseled clients...

Jill L. McCrory Attorney Litigation Lawyer Faegre Drinker

Jill McCrory is an experienced nurse and attorney who partners with health care and life sciences companies to navigate legal, regulatory, compliance and operational challenges. Jill has served as a litigation partner in a law firm setting, an in-house legal advisor at Eli Lilly and Company and an associate director at Navigant Consulting’s global life sciences regulatory and compliance practice. She leverages this background to provide business-minded strategies and legal counsel grounded in a nuanced understanding of the health and life sciences industry.

Eric M. Friedman Product Liability Litigation Attorney Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath Indianapolis, IN

Eric Friedman guides clients through all stages of product liability litigation, particularly working with expert witnesses to present the science behind clients' products. By leaning on his pre-law history as a biochemist, he is able to identify key arguments for and against clients and craft winning strategies for both motion practice and trial.

Before joining Faegre Drinker, Eric was an associate with a well respected defense firm in the San Francisco Bay Area. During his time there, he assisted clients with a wide variety of tort matters ranging from personal injury/wrongful...

Gary Rom Health Care Attorney Faegre Drinker Indianapolis, IN

Gary Rom goes beyond rule-based counsel to help health care clients develop creative, compliant solutions to launch and promote drugs and medical devices and their corresponding support programs.

An agile advisor and former legal associate for Eli Lilly and Company, Gary is intimately aware of the interplay between how products are marketed and how that marketing impacts competitor complaints, consumer protection actions and product liability. He partners with clients to help them understand that balance and navigate it aptly, accounting for business objectives and regulatory...