{"title":"Biosimilars in Oncology","authors":"A. Zelenetz","doi":"10.17925/OHR.2016.12.01.22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The escalating cost of cancer care is placing an increasing burden on healthcare systems worldwide, largely a result of expensive biologic therapies. With the patents on many biologics expiring, interest in biosimilars is rising. Biosimilars of biologic agents used for cancer treatment and supportive care are making their appearance in the US; this article therefore aims to increase understanding of the biosimilars concept. Biosimilars are very comparable to their reference products, but because of their size and complexity, are not identical. However, the inherent structural differences between biologics and their reference products may not translate to clinically meaningful differences in efficacy and safety. Biosimilars offer potential cost savings but present a challenge in terms of establishing a regulatory pathway. Regulatory approval requires comparative analytical and clinical studies in order to characterize and demonstrate the absence of clinically meaningful differences between biosimilars and their reference products. Initial approval may not include interchangeability, as additional evidence may be required before a biosimilar can be designated interchangeable with its reference product. A framework for the approval of biosimilars was established by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) in 2006 with the first biosimilar approved in April, 2006. Thus, the experience in Europe provides valuable insights into the use of biosimilars. The widespread use of biosimilars has the potential to reduce healthcare expenditure, as well as improving patient access without compromising patient outcomes, but clinician education and acceptance is crucial.","PeriodicalId":44122,"journal":{"name":"Oral History Review","volume":"12 1","pages":"22"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oral History Review","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17925/OHR.2016.12.01.22","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9
Abstract
The escalating cost of cancer care is placing an increasing burden on healthcare systems worldwide, largely a result of expensive biologic therapies. With the patents on many biologics expiring, interest in biosimilars is rising. Biosimilars of biologic agents used for cancer treatment and supportive care are making their appearance in the US; this article therefore aims to increase understanding of the biosimilars concept. Biosimilars are very comparable to their reference products, but because of their size and complexity, are not identical. However, the inherent structural differences between biologics and their reference products may not translate to clinically meaningful differences in efficacy and safety. Biosimilars offer potential cost savings but present a challenge in terms of establishing a regulatory pathway. Regulatory approval requires comparative analytical and clinical studies in order to characterize and demonstrate the absence of clinically meaningful differences between biosimilars and their reference products. Initial approval may not include interchangeability, as additional evidence may be required before a biosimilar can be designated interchangeable with its reference product. A framework for the approval of biosimilars was established by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) in 2006 with the first biosimilar approved in April, 2006. Thus, the experience in Europe provides valuable insights into the use of biosimilars. The widespread use of biosimilars has the potential to reduce healthcare expenditure, as well as improving patient access without compromising patient outcomes, but clinician education and acceptance is crucial.
期刊介绍:
The Oral History Review, published by the Oral History Association, is the U.S. journal of record for the theory and practice of oral history and related fields. The journal’s primary mission is to explore the nature and significance of oral history and advance understanding of the field among scholars, educators, practitioners, and the general public. The Review publishes narrative and analytical articles and reviews, in print and multimedia formats, that present and use oral history in unique and significant ways and that contribute to the understanding of the nature of oral history and memory. It seeks previously unpublished works that demonstrate high-quality research and that offer new insight into oral history practice, methodology, theory, and pedagogy. Work published in the journal arises from many fields and disciplines, reflecting the interdisciplinary nature of oral history. While based in the U.S., the Review reflects the international scope of the field and encourages work from international authors and about international topics.