The EU regulatory network and emerging trends – a review of quality, safety and clinical development programmes

Pub Date : 2021-06-15 DOI:10.5639/gabij.2021.1002.009
Marta Zuccarelli, Benjamin Micallef, Mark Cilia, A. Serracino-Inglott, J. Borg
{"title":"The EU regulatory network and emerging trends – a review of quality, safety and clinical development programmes","authors":"Marta Zuccarelli, Benjamin Micallef, Mark Cilia, A. Serracino-Inglott, J. Borg","doi":"10.5639/gabij.2021.1002.009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction/Study Objectives: The development of biosimilars is challenging due to the complexity of the active substances as well as the strict regulatory requirements to show similarity with a reference medicinal product. This review aims to describe the regulatory experience of approving biosimilars in the European Union (EU) within the EU framework, identify emerging trends in the EU regulatory pathway when approving biosimilars and discuss where the EU biosimilar framework is heading. Methods: Marketing authorisation applications (MAAs) submitted up to 2019 were retrieved from the public domain. The European public assessment report database was searched for approved biosimilars and clinical development programmes of biosimilars belonging to the same class were reviewed. In order to observe if biosimilars released onto the market increased safety concerns, we compared disproportionate adverse event reports pre- and post-licensure. Results: Up to December 2019, 90 MAAs were submitted and 53 biosimilars were approved for 14 different biologicals. Total number of clinical trials (both phase I and III) steadily goes up driven by an increase number of approvals in later years, while the average number of both phase I and III trials decreased over time with some with Pegfilgrastim biosimilars being approved without conducting any phase III clinical trials. No new safety concerns were identified from the analysis of disproportionate adverse event reports. Discussion: Clinical development programmes of biosimilars and the requirements set for biosimilars approval are changing over time. Biosimilars approved seem to be as well tolerated as the reference products when approved based on stringent regulatory requirements. Conclusion: Regulation of biosimilars is progressing as more knowledge is gained.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5639/gabij.2021.1002.009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction/Study Objectives: The development of biosimilars is challenging due to the complexity of the active substances as well as the strict regulatory requirements to show similarity with a reference medicinal product. This review aims to describe the regulatory experience of approving biosimilars in the European Union (EU) within the EU framework, identify emerging trends in the EU regulatory pathway when approving biosimilars and discuss where the EU biosimilar framework is heading. Methods: Marketing authorisation applications (MAAs) submitted up to 2019 were retrieved from the public domain. The European public assessment report database was searched for approved biosimilars and clinical development programmes of biosimilars belonging to the same class were reviewed. In order to observe if biosimilars released onto the market increased safety concerns, we compared disproportionate adverse event reports pre- and post-licensure. Results: Up to December 2019, 90 MAAs were submitted and 53 biosimilars were approved for 14 different biologicals. Total number of clinical trials (both phase I and III) steadily goes up driven by an increase number of approvals in later years, while the average number of both phase I and III trials decreased over time with some with Pegfilgrastim biosimilars being approved without conducting any phase III clinical trials. No new safety concerns were identified from the analysis of disproportionate adverse event reports. Discussion: Clinical development programmes of biosimilars and the requirements set for biosimilars approval are changing over time. Biosimilars approved seem to be as well tolerated as the reference products when approved based on stringent regulatory requirements. Conclusion: Regulation of biosimilars is progressing as more knowledge is gained.
分享
查看原文
欧盟监管网络和新兴趋势——对质量、安全性和临床开发项目的回顾
介绍/研究目的:由于活性物质的复杂性以及与参比药物相似的严格监管要求,生物类似药的开发具有挑战性。本综述旨在描述欧盟框架内批准生物仿制药的监管经验,确定批准生物仿制药时欧盟监管途径中的新趋势,并讨论欧盟生物仿制药框架的发展方向。方法:从公共领域检索截至2019年提交的上市许可申请(MAAs)。检索欧洲公共评估报告数据库,查找已批准的生物仿制药,并审查属于同类生物仿制药的临床开发计划。为了观察投放市场的生物仿制药是否增加了安全性问题,我们比较了许可前后不成比例的不良事件报告。结果:截至2019年12月,14种不同生物制剂共提交了90个maa, 53个生物仿制药获批。临床试验总数(包括I期和III期)在后期批准数量的增加的推动下稳步上升,而I期和III期试验的平均数量随着时间的推移而减少,一些Pegfilgrastim生物类似药在没有进行任何III期临床试验的情况下被批准。从不成比例的不良事件报告分析中没有发现新的安全问题。讨论:生物仿制药的临床开发计划和生物仿制药批准的要求正在随着时间的推移而变化。经批准的生物仿制药在严格的监管要求下获得批准时,似乎与参考产品一样具有良好的耐受性。结论:生物仿制药的监管随着知识的积累而不断进步。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信