RESUMO

We conducted a scoping review to map and critically examine the knowledge, perceptions and utilization of generics and biosimilars, among physicians, pharmacists, patients, the general population, and other stakeholders from LAC.

Assuntos

RESUMO

Introducción: Las toxinas botulínicas son medicamentos bioterapéuticos con grandes aplicaciones en el campo de la neurología, como la cefalea y los movimientos anormales. Debido a la importancia médica y al incremento de las indicaciones terapéuticas de la toxina botulínica, este artículo pretende hacer claridad acerca de la terminología básica con respecto a la naturaleza de este medicamento, a las diferencias estructurales con medicamentos convencionales y aspectos importantes en relación con su potencia biológica e inmunogenicidad, para así comprender las potenciales diferencias entre las toxinas disponibles y conceptuar en torno a la no intercambiabilidad o sustitución de una toxina por otra. Materiales y métodos: Revisión no sistemática, según lo recomendado en la Escala para la Verificación de los Artículos Revisiones Narrativas (Sanra). Conclusiones: Los medicamentos biológicos no son intercambiables entre sí, aunque demuestren bioequivalencia. No se pueden evaluar como medicamentos genéricos intercambiables porque son biológicos; no existen estudios comparativos cabeza a cabeza; son diferentes, debido al proceso individual de manufactura.

Introduction: Botulinum toxins are biotherapeutic drugs with great applications in the field of neurology such as headache and abnormal movements. Due to the medical importance and the increase in therapeutic indications of botulinum toxin, this article aims to clarify the basic terminology regarding the nature of this drug, the structural differences with conventional drugs and important aspects in relation to its biological potency and immunogenicity in order to understand the potential differences between the available toxins and conceptualize regarding the non-interchangeability or substitution of one toxin for another. Materials and methods: Non-systematic review as recommended in the Scale for the Verification of Narrative Review Articles (SANRA). Conclusions: Biological drugs are not interchangeable with each other, even if they demonstrate bioequi-valence. They cannot be evaluated as interchangeable generic drugs because they are biologics. There are no head-to-head comparative studies. They are different due to the individual manufacturing process.

Assuntos

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Latin America comprises a large set of culturally diverse middle-income countries sharing an inequality gap and a rapidly aging population. A better informed growing middle class adds to the pressure on fragmented health systems that strive to attain universal coverage. Cost containment becomes crucial for sustainability. AREAS COVERED: Using 'high cost' as free term, together with individual country names, a search was performed in Pubmed and Scopus databases for relevant documents centered on pharmaceutical products. References of selected articles were also reviewed. EXPERT OPINION: In the region as elsewhere improving health information systems has been the starting point. Official health technology assessment agencies have been established in several countries, supporting decisions on best available evidence. A few centralized procurement and price regulation schemes using international reference pricing have been successful. Fast-track approval of generics and biosimilars, or establishing a separate funding source for high cost technologies are other options that, with varying degrees of success, have been. Since Latin America is characterized by its social, geographical and political diversity, each health system needs to recognize its individual priorities, learn from successful experiences elsewhere, and adapt possible alternative interventions to the different local contexts.

Assuntos

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Biologic drugs such as adalimumab, etanercept, and infliximab represent major first-line and second-line treatments for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients. However, their high cost poses a massive burden on healthcare systems worldwide. The expiration of patents for these biologics has driven the production of biosimilar drugs, which are potentially less costly and remarkably similar, albeit not identical to the reference molecules. This paper aims to outline the protocol of a systematic review that will investigate the efficacy and safety profile of biosimilars compared to biologics (objective 1) and the impact of switching between biosimilar drugs and reference biologics on the management of RA patients (objective 2). METHODS: We will investigate the effects of any biosimilars of adalimumab, etanercept, and infliximab on RA patients. We will include randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs to assess efficacy and safety outcomes and RCTs with two- or multiple-part designs to evaluate the consequences of switching from reference biologics to biosimilar drugs (and vice-versa). Electronic searches will be performed through MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE, LILACS, and CENTRAL (from inception to April 2021). Two independent reviewers will screen studies, extract data, and evaluate the risk of bias. The latter will be carried out considering specific domains from equivalence trials and switching studies. Random-effects models will be fitted to obtain summary estimates using either relative risk or standardized mean difference as a metric. The primary outcome will be the rate of treatment success according to the American College of Rheumatology 20 (ACR20), and the co-primary outcome will be the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI). Conclusions will be based on equivalence hypothesis testing using predefined margins of equivalence elicited from a group of experienced rheumatologists and prior studies. The overall certainty of the evidence will be assessed based on the GRADE system. DISCUSSION: The present investigation proposes a comprehensive, clinician-oriented approach to assess the equivalence and the impact of switching between biosimilars and biologics on the management of patients with RA. Our results will elucidate the efficacy, safety, immunogenicity of biosimilars, and the clinical consequences of substituting biologics with biosimilars in the management of RA. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42019137152 and CRD42019137155.

Assuntos

RESUMO

Although rituximab is widely used off-label for complex pediatric diseases, safety reports are limited. We aimed to report evidence of its use in clinical practice, to describe the incidence of adverse drug reactions (ADR) to rituximab biosimilar Novex® and innovator, and to identify risk factors for the development of ADR in a real-life follow-up cohort of pediatric patients with complex diseases. We conducted a prospective, longitudinal, observational, single-centre study in patients that received rituximab for any complex disease, and as part of an intensive pharmacovigilance program. Demographic, pharmacological, clinical, and drug-related data were collected for all patients. ADR-free survival, including infusion-related reactions (IRR) and delayed ADR (dADR), was estimated using Kaplan-Meier curves. Risk factors were evaluated by multivariable Cox regression models. In total, 77 patients (<19 y.o.) received 187 infusions of rituximab Novex® (n = 155) or innovator rituximab (n = 32) for neurologic (Neu), immune-hematologic-rheumatic (IHR), oncologic (O) diseases, and hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT) or solid-organ transplantation (SOT). We recorded 29 IRR and 58 dADR that occurred in 27 (35.1%) and 29 (37.7%) patients, respectively. The respiratory tract was the most affected during IRR (29.6%) and hypogammaglobulinemia (37.9 %) was the most frequent dADR. First versus subsequent infusions (HR 5.4, CI95% 2.4-12.1, p<0.05), sex (boys vs. girls, HR 0.3, CI95% 0.1-0.8, and p<0.05), and diagnosis (Neu-IHR diseases vs. O-HSCT-SOT, HR 2.3, CI95% 1.02-5.4, and p < 0.05) were significantly associated with the development of IRR. For dADR, risk factors were diagnosis (Neu-IHR diseases vs. O-HSCT-SOT, HR 0.4, CI95% 0.2-0.9, and p < 0.05) and cumulative body surface area-normalized dosage (HR 1.0003, CI95% 1.0001-1.0006, and p < 0.05). The present is the largest real-world safety assessment of rituximab in Latin-American children with complex diseases supporting its use based on the overall acceptable safety. Identification of risk factors may contribute to optimization of off-label rituximab treatment in pediatrics.

RESUMO

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Biologics have revolutionized the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). However, these drugs had a significant influence on treatment-related costs, which resulted in the development of biosimilars. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the drug discontinuation rate in the IBD population who switched from originator to biosimilars in real-world switching studies and address potential nocebo effects as reasons for drug discontinuation. METHODS: Medline (via PubMed), EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and abstract databases of selected congresses were screened for reports of monoclonal antibody (mAb) switching with a minimum post-switch follow-up of >6 months or three infusions. All available information on discontinuation rates was assessed. RESULTS: A total of 30 observational studies were included, involving 3,594 patients with IBD. Twenty-six studies reported a switch from infliximab to CT-P13, two studies involved a switch to SB2, and switching information was not available in two studies. The discontinuation rates were 8%, 14%, and 21% at 6, 12, and 24 months, respectively. The main reasons for drug discontinuation and their respective risks were: disease worsening (2%), remission (4%), loss of adherence (4%), adverse events (5%), and loss of response (7%). The quality of the evidence ranged from low to very low depending on the outcome analyzed. Subjective symptoms leading to drug discontinuation were infrequently reported, and the nocebo effect was clearly assessed in just one of the included papers. CONCLUSION: Discontinuation rates following a switch to a biosimilar in patients with IBD increase over time. However, it was not possible to confirm the nocebo effect as a reason for discontinuation. Therefore, long-term studies evaluating the use of biosimilars to monitor adverse events and potential nocebo effects in post-marketing surveillance are still needed.

RESUMO CONTEXTO: Os biológicos revolucionaram o tratamento da doença inflamatória intestinal (DII). Ademais, esses medicamentos influenciaram os custos relacionados ao tratamento. Tal aumento significativo nos gastos com o tratamento motivou desenvolvimento dos biossimilares. OBJETIVO: Esta revisão sistemática e metanálise objetivou avaliar a taxa de descontinuação de medicamentos na população com DII que foi submetida à troca do biológico originador para um biossimilar, em estudos observacionais que abordaram possíveis razões para a descontinuação do tratamento. MÉTODOS: Tendo como base de dados Medline (via PubMed), EMBASE, Cochrane Library e resumos de congressos médicos, foram rastreados artigos com relatos de troca de um biológico originador por um biossimilar, com acompanhamento pós-troca de no mínimo 6 meses ou três infusões. Todas as informações disponíveis sobre as taxas de descontinuação foram avaliadas. RESULTADOS: Foram incluídos no total 30 estudos observacionais, envolvendo 3.594 pacientes com DII. Vinte e seis estudos relataram uma mudança do infliximabe para CT-P13, dois estudos envolveram uma mudança para o SB2, e as informações sobre a troca não estavam disponíveis em dois estudos. As taxas de descontinuação foram de 8%, 14% e 21% aos 6, 12 e 24 meses, respectivamente. Os principais motivos para a descontinuação do medicamento e seus respectivos riscos foram: agravamento da doença (2%), remissão (4%), perda de adesão (4%), eventos adversos (5%) e perda de resposta (7%). A qualidade da evidência variou de baixa a muito baixa, dependendo do resultado analisado. Os sintomas subjetivos que levaram à descontinuação do medicamento foram relatados com pouca frequência, e o efeito nocebo foi claramente avaliado em apenas um dos artigos incluídos. CONCLUSÃO: As taxas de descontinuação após a mudança para um biossimilar em pacientes com DII aumentam com o tempo. No entanto, não foi possível confirmar o efeito nocebo como motivo da descontinuação. Portanto, ainda são necessários estudos em longo prazo avaliando o uso de biossimilares para monitorar eventos adversos e potenciais efeitos nocebo na vigilância pós-comercialização.

Assuntos

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Health technology assessment (HTA) should provide an assessment of a technology's effects on health and of the related social, economic, organisational and ethical issues. HTA reports on biosimilars can specifically assess their immunogenicity, their extrapolation to one or more conditions, and the risks of interchangeability and substitution. We aimed to complete a scoping review within the context of HTA organisations to synthesise HTA reports on biosimilars and to map the extension, scope and methodological practices. MAIN BODY: A scoping review methodology was applied. The sources for biosimilars HTA reports were database searches and grey literature from HTA organisation websites up to June 2019. HTA reports of biosimilars were classified as full HTA, mini-HTA or rapid reviews. Data were extracted and recorded on a calibrated predefined data form. We identified 70 HTA reports of biosimilars of 16 biologic products (65.71% in 2015-2018) produced by 13 HTA organisations from 10 countries; 2 full HTAs, 4 mini-HTAs and 64 rapid reviews met the inclusion criteria. Almost all the rapid reviews gave no information regarding any evidence synthesis method and approximately half of the rapid reviews did not appraise the risk of bias of primary studies or the overall quality of evidence. All full-HTAs and mini-HTAs addressed organisational, ethical, social and legal considerations, while these factors were assessed in less than half of the rapid reviews. The immunogenicity and extrapolation of one or more conditions were often considered. The majority of full-HTAs and mini-HTAs contained an assessment of switching and a discussion of an educational approach about biosimilars. No HTA report rejected the adoption/reimbursement of the biosimilar assessed. CONCLUSION: HTA of biosimilars are emerging in the context of HTA organisations and those that exist often duplicate reports of the same biosimilar. Most HTA reports of biosimilars do not conduct a systematic literature review or consider economic issues. No report has rejected the adoption/reimbursement of biosimilars. There is a need to standardise the minimum criteria for the development of HTA on biosimilars to ensure a better understanding and better decision-making.

Assuntos

RESUMO

The Organizing Committee of the V International Congress on Immunopharmacology (Immunopharmacology 2020) organized by the Cuban Society of Pharmacology, BioCubaFarma and the International Union of Basic and Clinical Pharmacology (IUPHAR) would like to invite you to participate in this important event, scheduled for June 9 to 13, 2020 at the Convention Centre of the Melia Marina Varadero Hotel, Varadero Beach, Matanzas, Cuba. The Congress will be formed by different workshops and symposia such as: Fifth workshop on new advances in immunopharmacology Fifth workshop on neuroimmunology, neuroimmunopharmacology and neuroimmunomodulation. Immunopharmacology of brain tumors Symposium on hereditary ataxias Fifth symposium on pharmacology of cytochrome P450 and transporters Fourth symposium on inflammation and pain 2nd symposium on NFkB Synthetic peptides as immunopharmacological tools Novel designs in clinical trials. Biosimilar pharmaceuticals Pharmacogenetics, pharmacogenomics, proteomics and phosphoproteomics Immune response in cancer First symposium on business and international cooperation on biologics Immunopharmacology 2020 is sponsored by: Cuban Society of Pharmacology (SCF) International Union of Basic and Clinical Pharmacology (IUPHAR) Latin-American Association of Pharmacology (ALF) PAHO / WHO BioCubaFarma National research centers: Finlay Vaccine Institute (IFV); Center of Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology (CIGB); Center of Molecular Immunology (CIM); Center for Control of Drugs, Equipment and Medical Devices (CECMED); National Center for Animal and Plant Health (CENSA); Tropical Medicine Institute "Pedro Kourí" (IPK); National Center for Biopreparations (BioCEN); Center for Drug Research and Development (CIDEM); Center for Clinical Trials (CENCEC); among others International Manufacturers and Companies The key objectives of the Congress are: To provide a progressive state-of-the-art report for scientists, manufacturers, governmental authorities and healthcare workers, who need to be updated about the latest scientific developments for human vaccines, including basic science, product development, market introduction, immunization programs and epidemiological surveillance. To promote the scientific collaboration among experts and institutions through the experience exchange, the presentation of results and the discussion on the conference topics. To accelerate progress in the development of vaccines and the acceptance and introduction of new methods and technologies. Opening lectures, oral presentations and posters will provide you the opportunity to be involved in a high quality congress to discuss about the progress in the field of immunology and pharmacology sciences(AU)

Assuntos

RESUMO

Medicines are an economic good and a fundamental component of public and private spending and health decision-making. Assurance of their quality, efficiency and safety is essential. However, the variety of products on the Chilean market, including innovative and generic productsthe latter accounted for by many products that are certified as bioequivalent while others are notresults in a potentially confusing scenario for consumers and health providers. In this review, we intend to shed light on the concepts of bioequivalency (applicable to compounds of small molecular size) and biosimilarity (applicable to biological compounds of greater molecular complexity). In both cases, how the active substance interacts with the host organism must be demonstrated by studies carried out for this purpose. A direct application of the concept of bioequivalence is interchangeability, defined as the possibility of using a product of the same active principle, as long as the pharmaceutical form and dosage scheme are the same. Regulations related to bioequivalence and biosimilarity must not only guarantee safety and efficacy when products are interchanged, but also facilitate cost savings and access to medicines. Likewise, the implementation of evidence-based guidelines that standardize concepts of interchangeability should be encouraged, as this could lead to a more educated usage and a reduction in the information asymmetry between patients (users) and the industry. The importance of interchangeability of medicines is particularly relevant in two governmental health initiatives in Chile: the Explicit Health Guarantees Plan (GES) and the Financial Protection for Diagnoses and Treatments of High Cost, known as the Ricarte Soto Act. Nonetheless, it is not possible to guarantee that all alternative products to an innovative drug on the Chilean market are bioequivalent. The synthesis of knowledge available on this subject may impact and contribute to decision-making by stakeholders. It could also help to develop better health policies regarding bioequivalent and biosimilar pharmaceutical products in our country.

Los medicamentos constituyen un bien económico que forma parte del gasto público y privado y de la toma de decisiones en salud. El aseguramiento de su calidad, eficacia y seguridad resulta fundamental. Sin embargo, la variada oferta disponible en el mercado chileno, donde se reconocen productos innovadores y genéricos, constituye un escenario confuso para consumidores y proveedores en salud. En esta revisión pretendemos aclarar los conceptos de fármacos bioequivalentes (aplicable a compuestos de tamaño molecular pequeño) y fármacos biosimilares (para compuestos biológicos de mayor complejidad molecular). En ambos casos, el comportamiento en el organismo del principio activo debe ser demostrado mediante estudios realizados para este fin. Una aplicación directa del concepto de bioequivalencia es la intercambiabilidad, definida como la posibilidad de utilizar un producto de un mismo principio activo, mientras la forma farmacéutica y esquema de dosificación sean iguales. Las normas relativas a esta materia y los organismos públicos encargados, no solo debieran garantizar la seguridad y la eficacia en el intercambio entre productos, sino también aspectos relacionados con el costo, la accesibilidad a los fármacos y la implementación de una guía de homogeneización de conceptos y criterios de intercambiabilidad basados en la evidencia, lo cual impactaría en una mejor educación para los usuarios, reduciendo la asimetría de información entre el usuario y la industria. La importancia de la intercambiabilidad destaca en Chile en el contexto del Plan de Garantías Explícitas en Salud (GES) y la Ley de Protección Financiera para Diagnósticos y Tratamientos de Alto Costo en Salud (Ley Ricarte Soto). Sin embargo, no es posible garantizar que todos los productos alternativos al innovador presentes en el mercado chileno son bioequivalentes. El conocimiento disponible en esta temática puede impactar y contribuir a la toma de decisiones en los prescriptores y usuarios, así como en la elaboración de políticas públicas en torno a los productos farmacéuticos bioequivalentes y biosimilares en nuestro país.

Assuntos

RESUMO

Los medicamentos constituyen un bien económico que forma parte del gasto público y privado y de la toma de decisiones en salud. El aseguramiento de su calidad, eficacia y seguridad resulta fundamental. Sin embargo, la variada oferta disponible en el mercado chileno, donde se reconocen productos innovadores y genéricos, constituye un escenario confuso para consumidores y proveedores en salud. En esta revisión pretendemos aclarar los conceptos de fármacos bioequivalentes (aplicable a compuestos de tamaño molecular pequeño) y fármacos biosimilares (para compuestos biológicos de mayor complejidad molecular). En ambos casos, el comportamiento en el organismo del principio activo debe ser demostrado mediante estudios realizados para este fin. Una aplicación directa del concepto de bioequivalencia es la intercambiabilidad, definida como la posibilidad de utilizar un producto de un mismo principio activo, mientras la forma farmacéutica y esquema de dosificación sean iguales. Las normas relativas a esta materia y los organismos públicos encargados, no solo debieran garantizar la seguridad y la eficacia en el intercambio entre productos, sino también aspectos relacionados con el costo, la accesibilidad a los fármacos y la implementación de una guía de homogeneización de conceptos y criterios de intercambiabilidad basados en la evidencia, lo cual impactaría en una mejor educación para los usuarios, reduciendo la asimetría de información entre el usuario y la industria. La importancia de la intercambiabilidad destaca en Chile en el contexto del Plan de Garantías Explícitas en Salud (GES) y la Ley de Protección Financiera para Diagnósticos y Tratamientos de Alto Costo en Salud (Ley Ricarte Soto). Sin embargo, no es posible garantizar que todos los productos alternativos al innovador presentes en el mercado chileno son bioequivalentes. El conocimiento disponible en esta temática puede impactar y contribuir a la toma de decisiones en los prescriptores y usuarios, así como en la elaboración de políticas públicas en torno a los productos farmacéuticos bioequivalentes y biosimilares en nuestro país.

Medicines are an economic good and a fundamental component of public and private health spending and decision-making. Assurance of their quality, efficiency, and safety is essential. In Chile, the wide variety of available drugs, including innovator products, and generics­some of which are certified as bioequivalent, while others are not­creates a potentially confusing scenario for both consumers and health providers. In this review, we intend to shed light on the concepts of bioequivalency (the standard permitting interchangeability for small-molecule drugs) and biosimilarity (the standard permitting interchangeability for biological compounds of greater molecular complexity). In both cases, how the active substance interacts with the host organism must be demonstrated by studies designed and carried out for this purpose. Interchangeability is defined as the possibility of using a product of the same active principle, as long as the pharmaceutical form and dosage scheme are the same. Regulations related to bioequivalence and biosimilarity must not only guarantee safety and efficacy when products are interchanged but also facilitate cost savings and access to medicines. Implementation of evidence-based guidelines that standardize concepts of interchangeability could lead to more educated usage and reduced information asymmetry between patients (users) and industry. Drug interchangeability is particularly relevant in two government health initiatives in Chile: the Explicit Guarantees in Health Care (GES) plan, and the Law on Financial Protection for High-Cost Diagnostics and Treatment in Health Care (also known as the "Ricarte Soto Law"). Nonetheless, it is not possible to guarantee that all alternative drug products on the Chilean market are bioequivalents of the reference product. Synthesis of the available knowledge on bioequivalent and biosimilar pharmaceutical products in Chile could facilitate and contribute to stakeholder decision-making and the development of better health policies.

Assuntos

RESUMO

RESUMEN Los anticuerpos monoclonales son una poderosa herramienta para el diagnóstico de laboratorio y un instrumento cada vez más utilizado en el tratamiento de diversas enfermedades, siendo uno de los grupos más importantes de drogas en el tratamiento del cáncer. La revolución en el mundo de los anticuerpos ocurre en 1975 cuando Milstein y Köhler desarrollan la técnica de las hibridomas en Cambridge. Objetivo Hacer una revisión del uso de anticuerpos monoclonales en medicina y, en particular, en el tratamiento del cáncer. Se busca aportar una visión generalizada del concepto de anticuerpo monoclonal para explicar su aplicabilidad terapéutica y abordar un enfoque económico y sociosanitario de la obtención y acceso a las nuevas terapias. Método En la caracterización del fenómeno de investigación se empleó el estudio descriptivo, de recolección de datos documental y la correlación entre las distintas fuentes. Discusión Son aún elevados los costos tanto para el paciente como para los sistemas de salud pública, y se ha de optimizar la valoración costo-efectividad de modo que la rentabilidad y el acceso a tiempo para los pacientes puedan ser compatibles. Se deja abierto el reto del desarrollo de nuevos mAbs dirigidos a nuevas dianas, mejorar el perfil de seguridad, evitando o reduciendo las reacciones adversas inmunes y conseguir el abaratamiento del coste de producción mediante mejoras en la biotecnología.(AU)

ABSTRACT Monoclonal antibodies are a useful tool for laboratory diagnosis and an instrument used in the treatment of various diseases and represent one of the most important groups of new drugs for the treatment of cancer. The revolution in the world occured in 1975 when Milstein and Köhler discovered monoclonal antibodies in Cambridge. Objective To review the use of monoclonal antibodies in medicine and in the treatment of cancer. To provide a generalized vision of the concept of monoclonal antibody to explain its therapeutic applicability, and to approach an economic, health-care approach to obtaining and accessing new therapies. Method In the characterization of the research phenomenon, the descriptive study, the collection of documentary data and the correlation between the different sources were used. Discussion However, the costs for both the patient and the public health systems are still high, and the cost-effectiveness assessment must be optimized so that cost-effectiveness and access to time for patients can be compatible. And the challenge of developing new mAbs aimed at new targets, improving the safety profile, avoiding, or reducing adverse immune reactions and achieving lower production costs through improvements in biotechnology, is left open.(AU)

Assuntos

RESUMO

Resumo: Produtos biológicos revolucionaram a terapêutica mundial. O alto custo desses medicamentos, no entanto, ameaça a sustentabilidade dos sistemas de saúde. O desenvolvimento de cópias é tido como uma alternativa econômica, mas devido à complexidade desses produtos, muitos conceitos utilizados para os medicamentos genéricos não se aplicam. A intercambialidade entre produtos biológicos representa um desafio regulatório a ser superado. Este ensaio discute os principais desafios regulatórios relacionados ao estabelecimento de critérios para intercambialidade entre produtos biológicos novos e suas cópias no âmbito do Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS), considerando as diretrizes adotadas pelas principais agências reguladoras de medicamentos do mundo sobre a intercambialidade e o arcabouço regulatório vigente no Brasil para esta questão. Preocupações relacionadas à intercambialidade de produtos biológicos incluem substituição automática, nomenclatura, farmacovigilância, imunogenicidade e extrapolação das indicações terapêuticas e dos dados clínicos de produtos biológicos novos para suas cópias. Embora o sucesso clínico e os benefícios econômicos da alternância entre alguns produtos biológicos novos e seus biossimilares já tenham sido observados, a heterogeneidade das barreiras regulatórias para aprovação das cópias de produtos biológicos entre diferentes países deve ser considerada para a regulamentação da intercambialidade de produtos biológicos no Brasil.

Abstract: Biological products have sparked a worldwide therapeutic revolution. However, the high cost of these products threatens health systems' sustainability. The development of copies is considered an economic alternative, but due to the products' complexity, many concepts used in generic drugs do not apply. Interchangeability between biologicals poses a regulatory challenge. This essay discusses the main regulatory challenges for establishing criteria for interchangeability between new biologicals and their copies in the scope of the Brazilian Unified National Health System (SUS), considering the guidelines adopted by the world's main drug regulatory agencies concerning interchangeability and the prevailing Brazilian regulatory framework on this issue. Concerns related to the interchangeability of biologicals include automatic substitution, nomenclature, pharmacovigilance, immunogenicity, and extrapolation of therapeutic indications and clinical data from new biologicals to their copies. While the clinical success and economic benefits of switching from new biologicals to their biosimilars have already been observed, the heterogeneity between countries in the regulatory barriers to the approval of copies of biologicals should be taken into consideration during the regulation of interchangeability of biologicals in Brazil.

Resumen: Los productos biológicos revolucionaron la terapéutica mundial. El alto coste de estos medicamentos, no obstante, amenaza la sostenibilidad de los sistemas de salud. El desarrollo de copias se considera como una alternativa económica, pero debido a la complejidad de estos productos, muchos conceptos utilizados para los medicamentos genéricos no se aplican a los mismos. La intercambiabilidad entre productos biológicos representa un desafío regulatorio que se debe superar. Este trabajo discute los principales desafíos regulatorios, relacionados con el establecimiento de criterios para la intercambiabilidad entre productos biológicos nuevos y sus copias en el ámbito del Sistema Único de Salud (SUS), considerando las directrices adoptadas por las principales agencias regulatorias de medicamentos del mundo sobre la intercambiabilidad y el armazón regulatorio vigente en Brasil para esta cuestión. Las preocupaciones relacionadas con la intercambiabilidad de productos biológicos incluyen la sustitución automática, nomenclatura, farmacovigilancia, inmunogenicidad y extrapolación de las indicaciones terapéuticas, así como de los datos clínicos de productos biológicos nuevos para sus copias. A pesar de que el éxito clínico y los beneficios económicos de la alternancia entre algunos productos biológicos nuevos y sus biosimilares, ya se han observados, la heterogeneidad de las barreras regulatorias para la aprobación de las copias de productos biológicos entre los diferentes países debe ser considerada para la regulación de la intercambiabilidad de productos biológicos en Brasil.

Assuntos

RESUMO

Biological products or biopharmaceuticals are medicinal products derived from living systems and manufactured by modern biotechnological methods that differ widely from the traditional synthetic drugs. Monoclonal antibodies are the most rapidly growing type of biologic. They are much larger and more complex molecules with inherent diversity; therefore, different manufacturers cannot produce identical biological products, even with the same type of host expression system and equivalent technologies. Thus, legal follow-on biologics manufactured and marketed after patent expiration are usually referred to as biosimilars. Biosimilarity is based on a comparability exercise whereby unavoidable clinical differences are evaluated and must meet equivalence or non-inferiority criteria. Biosimilars need to comply with different regulatory requirements for market authorization in different sites. There are several other related issues that need to be defined by the national authorities, such as interchangeability, labeling and prescribing information. The Brazilian health surveillance agency follows the key principles established by the World Health Organization for the assessment of biosimilarity, although does not adopt the name 'biosimilar'. However, the agency also made a compromise on a standalone application pathway that does not require the usual comparability exercise with the reference product, originating nonbiosimilar copies. Interchangeability and the use of nonproprietary names are not regulated, giving rise to pressures on physicians and conflicts of interest in the decision making on biosimilar use. The scope of this article is to present the Brazilian regulation on biosimilars, its strengths and weaknesses, and to discuss it in the face of regulations in the USA and Europe.

RESUMO

Biological therapies have revolutionized the treatment of several cancers and systemic immune-mediated inflammatory conditions. Expiry of patents protecting a number of biologics has provided the opportunity to commercialize highly similar versions, known as biosimilars. Biosimilars are approved by regulatory agencies via an independent pathway that requires extensive head-to-head comparison with the originator product. Biosimilars have the potential to provide savings to healthcare systems and expand patient access to biologics. In Latin American countries, regulatory frameworks for biosimilar approval have been introduced in recent years, and biosimilars of monoclonal antibody and fusion protein therapies are now emerging. However, the situation in this region is complicated by the presence of "non-comparable biotherapeutics" (also known as "intended copies"), which have not been rigorously compared with the originator product. We review the considerations for clinicians in Latin American countries, focusing on monoclonal antibody biosimilars relevant to oncology, rheumatology, gastroenterology, and dermatology.

Assuntos

RESUMO

Purpose: To evaluate the toxicity of Erbitux as well as its biosimilar APZ001 antibody (APZ001) in pre-clinical animal models including mice, rabbits and cynomolgus monkeys. Methods: We performed analysis of normal behavior activity, autonomic and non-autonomic nervous functions, nervous-muscle functions, nervous excitability and sensorimotor functions on CD-1 mice. Subsequently, we studied that effects of APZ001 and Erbitux on respiratory system, cardiovascular system and kidney in Cynomolgus monkey models and performed local tolerance experiments on New Zealand rabbits. Results: The comparisons between APZ001 and Erbitux showed no significant differences in mice autonomic nervous system, nervous muscle functions, non-autonomic nervous functions, nervous excitability and sensorimotor functions between treated and untreated group (p>0.05). APZ001 and Erbitux showed negative effect on CD-1 mice in the present of pentobarbital sodium anesthesia (p>0.05). Single administrations of high, medium or low doses of APZ001 did not lead to monkey urine volume alterations (p>0.05). In human tissues, APZ001 and Erbitux showed positive signals in endocardium, lung type II alveolar epithelial cell and surrounding vessels, but showed negative results in kidney and liver tissues. No hemolysis phenomenon and serious side-effects in vessels and muscles were observed in rabbits when administrated with APZ001 and Erbitux respectively. Conclusion: The safety comparisons between APZ001 antibody and Erbitux showed that these two antibodies showed highly similarities in mice, rabbits and cynomolgus monkey animal models in consideration of pharmaceutical effects, indicating APZ001 might be a suitable substitute for Erbitux.(AU)

Assuntos

RESUMO

Abstract Purpose: To evaluate the toxicity of Erbitux as well as its biosimilar APZ001 antibody (APZ001) in pre-clinical animal models including mice, rabbits and cynomolgus monkeys. Methods: We performed analysis of normal behavior activity, autonomic and non-autonomic nervous functions, nervous-muscle functions, nervous excitability and sensorimotor functions on CD-1 mice. Subsequently, we studied that effects of APZ001 and Erbitux on respiratory system, cardiovascular system and kidney in Cynomolgus monkey models and performed local tolerance experiments on New Zealand rabbits. Results: The comparisons between APZ001 and Erbitux showed no significant differences in mice autonomic nervous system, nervous muscle functions, non-autonomic nervous functions, nervous excitability and sensorimotor functions between treated and untreated group (p>0.05). APZ001 and Erbitux showed negative effect on CD-1 mice in the present of pentobarbital sodium anesthesia (p>0.05). Single administrations of high, medium or low doses of APZ001 did not lead to monkey urine volume alterations (p>0.05). In human tissues, APZ001 and Erbitux showed positive signals in endocardium, lung type II alveolar epithelial cell and surrounding vessels, but showed negative results in kidney and liver tissues. No hemolysis phenomenon and serious side-effects in vessels and muscles were observed in rabbits when administrated with APZ001 and Erbitux respectively. Conclusion: The safety comparisons between APZ001 antibody and Erbitux showed that these two antibodies showed highly similarities in mice, rabbits and cynomolgus monkey animal models in consideration of pharmaceutical effects, indicating APZ001 might be a suitable substitute for Erbitux.

Assuntos

RESUMO

Globally, biosimilars are expected to have a key role in improving patient access to biological therapies and addressing concerns regarding the escalating cost of health care. Indeed, in Europe, increased use of biologics and reduced drug prices have been observed after the introduction of biosimilars. Recently, several monoclonal antibody biosimilars of anticancer therapies have been approved, and numerous others are in various stages of clinical development. Biosimilars are authorized via a regulatory pathway separate from that used for generic drugs; they are also regulated separately from novel biologics. Biosimilar approval pathways in many major regulatory regions worldwide are, to a broad degree, scientifically aligned. However, owing to regional differences in health care priorities, policies, and resources, some important regulatory inconsistencies are evident. Acceptance of biosimilars by health care systems, health care professionals, and patients will be a key factor in the uptake of these therapies, and such regulatory variations could contribute to confusion and diminished confidence regarding the quality, efficacy, and reliability of these agents. Furthermore, the need for manufacturers to account for regulatory inconsistencies introduces inefficiencies and delays into biosimilar development programs. These issues should be addressed if biosimilars are to attain their maximal global potential. This review summarizes the evolution of the global biosimilar landscape and provides examples of inconsistencies between regulatory requirements in different regions. In addition, we review ongoing efforts to improve regulatory alignment and highlight the importance of education as a crucial factor in generating trust in, and acceptance of, biosimilars on a worldwide scale. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Biosimilars of monoclonal antibody anticancer therapies are beginning to emerge, and more are likely to become available for clinical use in the near future. The extent to which biosimilars can contribute to cancer care will depend on their level of acceptance by health care systems, health care professionals, and patients. A better understanding of the regulatory basis for the approval of biosimilars may enhance confidence and trust in these agents. In order to have informed discussions about treatment choices with their patients, oncologists should familiarize themselves with the biosimilar paradigm.

Assuntos

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Biosimilars could be a promising option to help decrease healthcare costs and expand access to treatment. There is no previous evidence of a global bibliometric analysis on biosimilars. Therefore, we aimed to assess the quantity and quality of worldwide biosimilars research. METHODS: We performed a bibliometric analysis using documents about biosimilars published until December 2016 in journals indexed in Scopus. We extracted the annual research, languages, countries, journals, authors, institutions, citation frequency, and the metrics of journals. The data were quantitatively and qualitatively analyzed using Microsoft Excel 2013. Additional information about authors' participation was obtained using the R-package Bibliometrix. Publication activity was adjusted for the countries by population size. Also, author co-citation analysis and a term co-occurrence analysis with the terms included in the title and abstract of publications was presented as network visualization maps using VOSviewer. RESULTS: A total of 2330 biosimilar-related documents identified in the Scopus database, most of them were articles (1452; 62.32%). The number of documents published had an exponential increased between 2004 and 2016 (p < 0.001). The United States was the country with the highest production with 685 (29.40%) documents followed by Germany and UK with 293 (12.58%) and 248 (10.64%), respectively. Switzerland (11.05), Netherlands (5.85) and UK (3.83) showed the highest per capita ratio. The highest citation/article ratio were for the Netherlands (28.06), Spain (24.23), and France (20.11). Gabi Journal published 73 (3.13%) documents; both Biopharm International and Pharmaceutical Technology and Mabs, 41 (1.76%). Three out of top ten journals were Trade publications. Amgen Incorporated from the USA was the most prolific institution with 51 documents followed by Pfizer Inc. with 48. Terms about specific diseases and drugs were found in recent years, compared with terms such as legislation, structure, protein, dose and generic in the early years. CONCLUSIONS: Research production and publication of documents on biosimilars are increasing. The majority of publications came from high-income countries. The trends in terminology use are according to state of the art in the topic, and reflects the interest in the utilization of biosimilars in diseases who are expected to obtain benefits of its use.

RESUMO

ABSTRACT The manufacturing process for biological products is complex, expensive and critical to the final product, with an impact on their efficacy and safety. They have been increasingly used to treat several diseases, and account for approximately 50% of the yearly budget for the Brazilian public health system. As the patents of biological products expire, several biosimilars are developed. However, there are concerns regarding their efficacy and safety; therefore, the regulatory agencies establish rules to approve and monitor these products. In Brazil, partnership programs between national government-owned companies and private technology holders have been implemented, aiming at knowledge sharing, capacity-building and technological transfer. Such partnerships locally promote manufacturing of these strategic drugs at reduced costs to the public health system. These agreements offer mutual advantages to both the government and patent holders: for the former, a biotechnological development flow is established and enables potential cost reduction and self-sufficient production; whereas for the latter, exclusive sales of the product are ensured during technological transfer, for a fixed period.

RESUMO O processo de manufatura de produtos biológicos é complexo, oneroso e crítico para o produto final, com impacto em sua eficácia e segurança. Seu uso está sendo cada vez mais ampliado no tratamento de diversas doenças, e cerca de 50% do orçamento anual do sistema de saúde público brasileiro é consumido por tais produtos. Com o término da proteção de patentes de produtos biológicos diversos, estão sendo desenvolvidos os biossimilares. Porém, há preocupações relacionadas com sua eficácia e segurança, fazendo com que os órgãos reguladores criem regulamentações para sua aprovação e monitoramento. No Brasil, estão sendo implantados programas de parceria entre laboratórios públicos nacionais e laboratórios detentores de tecnologia, objetivando a obtenção de conhecimento, capacitação profissional e transferência desta tecnologia. Tais parcerias visam à produção local destes medicamentos estratégicos a um custo reduzido para o Sistema Único de Saúde. Os acordos oferecem vantagens mútuas para o governo e o laboratório detentor da patente do produto biológico: ao primeiro, estabelece-se um fluxo de desenvolvimento biotecnológico, que possibilita potencial redução de custos e autossuficiência na produção, enquanto ao segundo garante-se a exclusividade da venda do produto durante a transferência da tecnologia por um prazo estabelecido.

Assuntos

Assuntos