BioDrugs

, Volume 31, Issue 2, pp 83–91 | Cite as

Interchangeability of Biosimilars: A European Perspective

  • Pekka Kurki
  • Leon van Aerts
  • Elena Wolff-Holz
  • Thijs Giezen
  • Venke Skibeli
  • Martina Weise
Current Opinion

Abstract

Many of the best-selling ‘blockbuster’ biological medicinal products are, or will soon be, facing competition from similar biological medicinal products (biosimilars) in the EU. Biosimilarity is based on the comparability concept, which has been used successfully for several decades to ensure close similarity of a biological product before and after a manufacturing change. Over the last 10 years, experience with biosimilars has shown that even complex biotechnology-derived proteins can be copied successfully. Most best-selling biologicals are used for chronic treatment. This has triggered intensive discussion on the interchangeability of a biosimilar with its reference product, with the main concern being immunogenicity. We explore the theoretical basis of the presumed risks of switching between a biosimilar and its reference product and the available data on switches. Our conclusion is that a switch between comparable versions of the same active substance approved in accordance with EU legislation is not expected to trigger or enhance immunogenicity. On the basis of current knowledge, it is unlikely and very difficult to substantiate that two products, comparable on a population level, would have different safety or efficacy in individual patients upon a switch. Our conclusion is that biosimilars licensed in the EU are interchangeable.

References

  1. 1.
    European Commission, DG Enterprise and industry. What you Need to Know about Biosimilar Medicinal Products. Process on Corporate Responsibility in the Field of Pharmaceuticals Access to Medicines in Europe. A Consensus Information Document, 2013. http://europa.eu/geninfo/query/resultaction.jsp?query_source=GROWTH&QueryText=biosimilars&op=Search&swlang=en&form_build_id=form-CA4kk1hS9th2Qw_AyEvYWFKAUUlCNvY6kFflINvXlD4&form_id=nexteuropa_europa_search_search_form. Accessed 30 Sept 2016.
  2. 2.
    Rak Tkaczuk K, Jacobs I. Biosimilars in oncology: from development to clinical practice. Semin Oncol. 2014;41(Suppl 3):S3–12.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ebbers HC, Chamberlain P. Interchangeability. An insurmountable fifth hurdle? GaBI J 2014;3:88–93.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ebbers H, Crow S, Vulto A, Schellekens H. Interchangeability, immunogenicity and biosimilars. Nat Biotechnol. 2012;30:1186–90.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hlavaty T, Letkovsky J. Biosimilars in the therapy of inflammatory bowel diseases. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2014;26:581–687.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    The Alliance for Safe Biologic Medicines (ASBM). Interchangeability and Physician Notification. http://safebiologics.org/resources/in-the-states/. Accessed 30 Sept 2016.
  7. 7.
    Dranitsaris G, Amir E, Dorward K. Biosimilars of biological drug therapies: regulatory, clinical and commercial considerations. Drugs. 2011;71:1527–36.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Declerck P. Biologicals and biosimilars: a review of the science and its implications. GaBI J. 2012;1:13–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cortes J, Curigliano G, Dieras V. Expert perspectives on biosimilar monoclonal antibodies in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2014;144:233–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    No authors listed. Building a wall against biosimilars. Nat Biotechnol. 2013;31:264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Vezér B, Buzás Z, Sebeszta M, Zrubka Z. Authorized manufacturing changes for therapeutic monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) in European Public Assessment Report (EPAR) documents. Curr Med Res Opin. 2016;32:829–34.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    European Medicines Agency (EMA). ICH Q5E, CPMP/ICH/5721/03. Comparability of Biotechnological/Biological Products: Note for guidance on biotechnological/biological products subject to changes in their manufacturing process. http://www.ema.europa.eu/ema/index.jsp?curl=pages/regulation/general/general_content_000888.jsp&mid=WC0b01ac058002956b. Accessed 30 Sept 2016.
  13. 13.
    European Medicines Agency (EMA): Guideline on Similar Biological Medicinal Products. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2014/10/WC500176768.pdf. Accessed 30 Sept 2016.
  14. 14.
    Ebbers H, Münzenberg M, Schellekens H. The safety of switching between therapeutic proteins. Expert Opin Biol Ther. 2012;12:1473–85.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jelkmann W. The ESA scenario gets complex: from biosimilar epoetins to activin traps. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2015;30:553–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Weise M, Bielsky MC, De Smet K, et al. Biosimilars: why terminology matters. Nat Biotechnol. 2011;29(8):690–3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    European Medicines Agency (EMA). European Public Assessment reports. http://www.ema.europa.eu/ema/index.jsp?curl=pages/medicines/landing/epar_search.jsp&mid=WC0b01ac058001d124. Accessed 30 Sept 2016.
  18. 18.
    Yu Y, Teerenstra S, Neef C, Burger D, Maliepaard M. A comparison of the intrasubject variation in drug exposure between generic and brand-name drugs: a retrospective analysis of replicate design trials. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2016;81(4):667–78.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    European Medicines Agency (EMA). Immunogenicity assessment of biotechnology-derived therapeutic proteins, rev1. http://www.ema.europa.eu/ema/index.jsp?curl=pages/regulation/general/general_content_001391.jsp&mid=WC0b01ac058002958c. Accessed 1 Sept 2019.
  20. 20.
    Stephens S, Emtage S, Vetterlein O, Chaplin L, Bebbington C, Nesbitt A, et al. Comprehensive pharmacokinetics of a humanized antibody and analysis of residual anti-idiotypic responses. Immunology. 1995;85:668–74.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Chamberlain P. Multidisciplinary approach to evaluating immunogenicity of biosimilars: lessons learned and open questions based on 10 years’ experience of the European Union regulatory pathway. Biosimilars. 2014;4:23–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Chung CH, Mirakhur B, Chan E, Le QT, Berlin J, Morse M, et al. Cetuximab-induced anaphylaxis and IgE specific for galactose-alpha-1,3-galactose. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:1109–17.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Casadevall N, Nataf JM, Viron B, et al. Pure red-cell aplasia and antierythropoietin antibodies in patients treated with recombinant erythropoietin. N Engl J Med. 2002;346:469–75.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ruiz-Argüello MB, Maguregui A, Ruiz Del Agua A, Pascual-Salcedo D, Martínez-Feito A, Jurado T, et al. Antibodies to infliximab in Remicade-treated rheumatic patients show identical reactivity towards biosimilars. Ann Rheum Dis. 2016;75(9):1693–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ben-Horin S, Yavzori M, Benhar I, Fudim E, Picard O, Ungar B, et al. Cross-immunogenicity: antibodies to infliximab in Remicade-treated patients with IBD similarly recognise the biosimilar Remsima. Gut. 2016;65(7):1132–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Pate M, Kelly Smith J, Chi D, Krishnaswamy G. Regulation and dysregulation of immunoglobulin E: a molecular and clinical perspective. Clin Mol Allergy. 2010;8:3.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Smith-Garvin J, Koretzky G, Jordan M. T Cell Activation. Annu Rev Immunol. 2009;27:591–619.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Gallucci S, Matzinger P. Danger signals: SOS to the immune system. Curr Opin Immunol. 2001;13:114–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wolfert MA, Boons G-J. Adaptive immune activation: glycosylation does matter. Nat Chem Biol. 2013;9:776–84.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Schneider C. Biosimilars in rheumatology: the wind of change. Ann Rheum Dis. 2013;72:315–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Haag-Weber M, Vetter A, Thyroff-Friesinger U, INJ-study group. Therapeutic equivalence, long-term and safety of HX575 in the treatment of anemia in chronic renal failure patients receiving hemodialysis. Clin Nephrol. 2009;72:380–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Seidl A, Hainzl O, Richter M, Fischer R, Böhm S, Deutel B, et al. Tungsten-induced denaturation and aggregation of epoetin-alfa during primary packaging as a cause of immunogenicity. Pharm Res. 2012;29:1454–67.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Fotiou F, Aravind S, Wang PP, Nerapusee O. Impact of illegal trade on the quality of epoetin alfa in Thailand. Clin Ther. 2009;31:336–46.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Gouw S, van der Born J, Ljung R, Escuriola C, Cid AR, Claeyssens-Donadel S, et al. Factor VIII products and inhibitor development in severe hemophilia A. N Engl J Med. 2013;368:231–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Santagostino E, Auerswald G, Benson G, Dolan G, Jiménez-Yuste V, Lambert T, et al. Switching treatments in haemophilia: is there a risk of inhibitor development? Eur J Haematol. 2015;94:284–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Gneiss C, Koudouovoh-Tripp PM, Ropele S, Gotwald T, Ehling R, Lutterotti A, et al. Influence of interferon-beta therapy switching on neutralizing antibody titres: results from the Austrian Switch Study. Mult Scler. 2009;15:1481–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    European Medicines Agency (EMA). CHMP assessment report: herceptin subcutaneous formulation. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/EPAR_-_Assessment_Report_-_Variation/human/000278/WC500153233.pdf. Accessed 30 Sept 2016.
  38. 38.
    Smits LJ, Derikx LA, de Jong DJ, Boshuizen RS, van Esch AA, Drenth JP, Hoentjen F. Clinical outcomes following a switch from Remicade® to the biosimilar CT-P13 in inflammatory bowel disease patients: a prospective observational cohort study. J Crohns Colitis. 2016;10(11):1287–93. doi:10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjw087.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Benucci M, Gobbi FL, Bandinelli F, Damiani A Infantino M, Grossi V, et al. Safety, efficacy and immunogenicity of switching from innovator to biosimilar infliximab in patients with spondyloarthritis: a 6-month real-life observational study. Immunol Res. 2016. doi:10.1007/s12026-016-8843-5 (Epub 23 Jul 2016).
  40. 40.
    Buer LC, Moum BA, Cvancarova M, Warren DJ, Medhus AW, Høivik ML. Switching from Remicade® to Remsima® is safe and feasible: a prospective, open-label study. J Crohns Colitis. 2016. doi:10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjw166 (Epub 22 September 2016).
  41. 41.
    Flodmark C-E, Lilja K, Woehling H, Järvholm K. Switching from originator to biosimilar human growth hormone using dialogue teamwork: single-center experience from Sweden. Biol Ther. 2013;3:35–43.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Romer T, Zabransky M, Walczak M, Szalecki M, Balzer S. Effect of switching recombinant human growth hormone: comparative analysis of phase 3 clinical data. Biol Ther. 2011;1:005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Rashid N, Saenger P, Wu YL, et al. Switching to Omnitrope® from other recombinant human growth hormone therapies: retrospective study in an integrated healthcare system. Biol Ther. 2014;4:27–39.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Hörbrand F, Bramlage P, Fischaleck J, Hasford J, Brunkhorst R. A population-based study comparing biosimilar versus originator erythropoiesis-stimulating agent consumption in 6,117 patients with renal anaemia. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2013;69:929–36.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Yoo DH, Prodanovic N, Jaworski J, Miranda P, Ramiterre E, Lanzon A, et al. Efficacy and safety of CT-P13 (biosimilar infliximab) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: comparison between switching from reference infliximab to CT-P13 and continuing CT-P13 in the PLANETRA extension study. Ann Rheum Dis. 2017;76(2):355–63. doi:10.1136/annrheumdis-2015-208786.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    McKeage K. A review of CT-P13: an infliximab biosimilar. BioDrugs. 2014;28:313–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Nikiphorou E, Kautiainen H, Hannonen P, Asikainen J, Kokko A, Rannio T, Sokka T. Clinical effectiveness of CT-P13 (Infliximab biosimilar) used as a switch from Remicade (infliximab) in patients with established rheumatic disease. Report of clinical experience based on prospective observational data. Expert Opin Biol Ther. 2015;15(12):1677–83.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Dapavo P, Vujic I, Fierro MT, Pietro Q, Sanlorenzo M. The infliximab biosimilar in the treatment of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2016;75(4):736–9. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2016.04.068.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Sieczkowska J, Jarzebicka D, Banaszkiewicz A, Plocek A, Gawronska A, Toporowska-Kowalska E, et al. Switching between infliximab originator and biosimilar in paediatric patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Preliminary observations. J Crohns Colitis. 2016;10(2):127–32.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Park SH, Kim YH, Lee JH, Kwon HJ, Lee SH, Park DI, et al. Post-marketing study of biosimilar infliximab (CT-P13) to evaluate its safety and efficacy in Korea. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015;9(Suppl 1):35–44.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Kolar M, et al. ‘P1410—switching of patients with inflammatory bowel disease from original infliximab (Remicade®) to biosimilar infliximab (Remsima®) is effective and safe—one-year follow-up.’ In: Abstract presented at the United European Gastroenterology (UEG) Week meeting, 15–19 October 2016, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Jørgensen K, et al. ‘LB15—biosimilar infliximab (CT-P13) is not inferior to originator infliximab: results from the 52-week randomized NOR-SWITCH trial.’ In: Abstract presented at the United European Gastroenterology (UEG) Week meeting, 15–19 October 2016, Vienna, Austria. https://cslide.ctimeetingtech.com/ueg2016/confcal/switch. Accessed 27 Oct 2016.
  53. 53.
    Smolen JS, Choe J-Y, Prodanovic N, Niebrzydowski J, Staykov I, Dokoupilova E, et al. (FRI0162) comparable safety and immunogenicity and sustained efficacy after transition To SB2 (an infliximab biosimilar) vs ongoing infliximab reference product in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: results of phase III transition study (a poster. Ann Rheum Dis. 2016;75:488.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    US Department of Health and Human Services. US Food and Drug Administration. 2016 Meeting materials, arthritis advisory committee. Briefing Information for the July 12–13, 2016, Meeting of the Arthritis Advisory Committee (AAC). http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMaterials/Drugs/ArthritisAdvisoryCommittee/ucm481975.htm. Accessed 30 Dec 2016.
  55. 55.
    Declerck P, Mellstedt H, Danese S. Biosimilars: terms of use. Curr Med Res Opin. 2015;31:2325–30.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Minghetti P, Rocco P, Schellekens H. The constrained prescription interchangeability and substitution of biosimilars. Nat Biotechnol. 2015;33:688–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Vermeer N, Straus S, Mantel-Teeuwisse A, Domergue F, Egberts ACG, Leufkens HGM, de Bruin ML. Traceability of biopharmaceuticals in spontaneous reporting systems: a cross-sectional study in the FDA adverse event reporting system (FAERS) and EudraVigilance data bases. Drug Saf. 2013;36:617–25.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Valensi P, Benroubi M, Borzi V, Gumprecht J, Kawamori R, Shaban J, et al. Initiating insulin therapy with, or switching existing insulin therapy to, insulin aspart 30/70 (Novomix 30) in routine care: safety and effectiveness in patients with type 2 diabetes in the IMPROVE observational study. Int J Clin Pract. 2009;63:522–31.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Ormerod AD. Switching biologicals for psoriasis. Br J Dermatol. 2010;163:667–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    D’Haens GR, Panaccione R, Higgins PD, et al. The London position statement of the world congress of gastroenterology on biological therapy for IBD with the European Crohn’s and colitis organisation: when to start, when to stop, which drug to choose and how to predict response? Am J Gastroenterol. 2011;106:199–212.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Annese V, Avendaño-Solá C, Breedveld F, Ekman N, Giezen TJ, Gomollón F, et al. Roundtable on biosimilars with European regulators and medical societies, Brussels, Belgium, 12 January 2016. GaBI J. 2016;5(2):74–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Medicines Evaluation Board (MEB). Are biosimilar medicinal products interchangeable? https://english.cbg-meb.nl/latest/news/2015/08/17/clarification-of-stance-on-biological-and-biosimilarmedicines. Accessed 19 Jan 2017.
  63. 63.
    Finnish Medicines Agency Fimea. Are biosimilars interchangeable? https://www.fimea.fi/documents/542809/838272/29197_Biosimilaarien_vaihtokelpoisuus_EN.pdf. Accessed 19 Jan 2017.
  64. 64.
    Healthcare Improvement Scotland and NHS. Biosimilar medicines: a national prescribing framework. May 2015. http://www.healthcareimprovementscotland.org/our_work/technologies_and_medicines/programme_resources/biosimilar_medicines_framework.aspx. Accessed 2 Oct 2016.
  65. 65.
    Health Products Regulatory Agency (Ireland). Guide to biosimilars for healthcare professionals and patients. December 2015. https://www.hpra.ie/docs/default-source/publications-forms/guidance-documents/guide-to-biosimilars-for-healthcare-professionals-and-patients-v2.pdf?sfvrsn=18. Accessed 2 Oct 2016.
  66. 66.

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Finnish Medicines Agency, FIMEAHelsinkiFinland
  2. 2.Medicines Evaluation BoardUtrechtThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Paul-Ehrlich-Institut (PEI)LangenGermany
  4. 4.Foundation Pharmacy for Hospitals in HaarlemHaarlemThe Netherlands
  5. 5.Norwegian Medicines AgencyOsloNorway
  6. 6.Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical DevicesBonnGermany

Personalised recommendations