Drug Safety

, Volume 32, Issue 10, pp 811–817 | Cite as

Pharmacovigilance of Biopharmaceuticals

Challenges Remain
  • Thijs J. Giezen
  • Aukje K. Mantel-Teeuwisse
  • Hubert G. M. Leufkens
Review Article


Biopharmaceuticals are important treatment options for a variety of chronic and sometimes life-threatening diseases. Compared with the traditional small molecule drugs, biopharmaceuticals have specific characteristics, which might also influence their safety profile. They have, for example, a complex production process, limited predictability of preclinical to clinical data, a high potential for immunogenicity, and adverse events can often be related to an exaggerated pharmacology. The limited predictability of preclinical to clinical data and the known limitations of randomized controlled trials results in limited knowledge of the safety profile of biopharmaceuticals at the point of their approval, underlining the need for pharmacovigilance. Due to their specific characteristics, pharmacovigilance activities required for biopharmaceuticals might differ from those required for small molecules. This review discusses characteristics and potential challenges with the pharmacovigilance and risk management of biopharmaceuticals as compared with small molecules, and proposes remedies for some of the emerging problems.

Spontaneous reporting of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) is important in the detection of new, rare and/or serious ADRs. However, causality assessment remains complicated because of concomitant diseases or drugs. This is particularly the case with biopharmaceuticals, as they are often indicated to treat severe and/or life-threatening diseases in patients who often have other diseases and are treated with concomitant medication.

Proactive risk management has been implemented in the EU by the obligatory submission of an EU risk management plan (EU-RMP). In this, the (potential) risks should be described and pharmacovigilance activities proposed. Pharmacovigilance activities can be either routine or additional (post-authorization safety studies [PASS]) activities. During safety assessment, stakeholders are encouraged to use knowledge obtained with biopharmaceuticals with a comparable pharmacology. PASS of biopharmaceuticals with a comparable pharmacology may therefore be used to complement each other.

Since biopharmaceuticals are often used in a specialized hospital setting, it is expected that large population-based databases will contain limited information on biopharmaceuticals. Registries have therefore been shown to be an important tool to obtain pharmacovigilance data.

Since small changes in the production and purification process might alter the safety profile, activities to improve traceability of the specific biopharmaceutical responsible for the ADR should be taken into account.

Key messages in safety management of biopharmaceuticals remain: be prepared for the unexpected, be aware of confounding by disease (severity) and maintain exposure ascertainment/traceability throughout the logistical chain.



The authors declare no conflict of interest relevant to the subject matter or materials discussed in the review. The Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacotherapy employing the authors has received unrestricted funding for pharmacoepidemiological research from GlaxoSmithKline, Novo Nordisk, the private-public funded Top Institute Pharma (www.tipharma.nl; includes co-funding from universities, government and industry), the Dutch Medicines Evaluation Board and the Dutch Ministry of Health. No sources of funding were used to assist in the preparation of this review.

The views expressed in this review are the personal views of the authors and may not be understood or quoted as being made on behalf of or reflecting the position of the EMEA or any other regulatory agency, or one of its committees or working parties.


  1. 1.
    Schellekens H. How similar do ‘biosimilars’ need to be? Nat Biotechnol 2004 Nov; 22(11): 1357–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Crommelin DJ, Storm G, Verrijk R, et al. Shifting paradigms: biopharmaceuticals versus low molecular weight drugs. Int J Pharm 2003 Nov; 266(1–2): 3–16PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hamilton CD. Infectious complications of treatment with biologic agents. Curr Opin Rheumatol 2004 Jul; 16(4): 393–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Imperato AK, Smiles S, Abramson SB. Long-term risks associated with biologic response modifiers used in rheumatic diseases. Curr Opin Rheumatol 2004 May; 16(3): 199–205PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Schellekens H. Immunologic mechanisms of EPO-associated pure red cell aplasia. Best Pract Res Clin Haematol 2005 Sep; 18(3): 473–80PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Suntharalingam G, Perry MR, Ward S, et al. Cytokine storm in a phase 1 trial of the anti-CD28 monoclonal antibody TGN1412. N Engl J Med 2006 Sep; 355(10): 1018–28PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brennan FR, Shaw L, Wing MG, et al. Preclinical safety testing of biotechnology-derived pharmaceuticals: understanding the issues and addressing the challenges. Mol Biotechnol 2004 May; 27(1): 59–74PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kessler M, Goldsmith D, Schellekens H. Immunogenicity of biopharmaceuticals. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2006; 21 Suppl. 5: v9–12PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schellekens H. Bioequivalence and the immunogenicity of biopharmaceuticals. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2002 Jun; 1(6): 457–62PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ryff JC, Schellekens H. Immunogenicity of rDNA-derived pharmaceuticals. Trends Pharmacol Sci 2002 Jun; 23(6): 254–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Stricker BH, Psaty BM. Detection, verification, and quantification of adverse drug reactions. BMJ 2004 Jul; 329(7456): 44–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use. Guideline on risk management systems for medicinal products for human use. London: European Medicines Agency, Nov 2005Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lasser KE, Allen PD, Woolhandler SJ, et al. Timing of new black box warnings and withdrawals for prescription medications. JAMA 2002 May; 287(17): 2215–20PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bakke OM, Manocchia M, de Abajo F, et al. Drug safety discontinuations in the United Kingdom, the United States, and Spain from 1974 through 1993: a regulatory perspective. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1995 Jul; 58(1): 108–17PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Meyboom RHB, Gribnau FWJ, Hekster YA, et al. Characteristics of topics in pharmacovigilance in The Netherlands. Clin Drug Invest 1996; 12: 207–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Giezen TJ, Mantel-Teeuwisse AK, Straus SM, et al. Safety-related regulatory actions for biologicals approved in the United States and the European Union. JAMA 2008 Oct; 300(16): 1887–96PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hazell L, Shakir SA. Under-reporting of adverse drug reactions: a systematic review. Drug Saf 2006 May; 29(5): 385–96PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Meyboom RH, Egberts AC, Gribnau FW, et al. Pharmacovigilance in perspective. Drug Saf 1999 Dec; 21(6): 429–47PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Meyboom RH, Hekster YA, Egberts AC, et al. Causal or casual? The role of causality assessment in pharmacovigilance. Drug Saf 1997 Dec; 17(6): 374–89PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Jones JL, Loftus Jr EV. Lymphoma risk in inflammatory bowel disease: is it the disease or its treatment? Inflamm Bowel Dis 2007 Oct; 13(10): 1299–307PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Meyboom RHB, Star K, Bate J, et al. TNF-α inhibitors and leukaemia: international pharmacovigilance reports. Drug Saf 2008 May;31(5): 445–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mohan AK, Cote TR, Block JA, et al. Tuberculosis following the use of etanercept, a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor. Clin Infect Dis 2004 Aug; 39(3): 295–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mohan N, Edwards ET, Cupps TR, et al. Leukocytoclastic vasculitis associated with tumor necrosis factor-alpha blocking agents. J Rheumatol 2004 Oct; 31(10): 1955–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    International Conference on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use. ICH harmonised tripartite guideline pharma-covigilance planning E2E, 18 November 2004 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.ich.org/LOB/media/MEDIA1195.pdf [Accessed 2009 Jul 24]
  25. 25.
    Giezen TJ, Mantel-Teeuwisse AK, Leufkens HGM, et al. Risk management of biopharmaceuticals: a regulatory perspective. Eur J Hosp Pharm Pract 2007; 6: 72–4Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Boren EJ, Cheema GS, Naguwa SM, et al. The emergence of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML) in rheumatic diseases. J Autoimmun 2008 Feb–Mar; 30(1–2): 90–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    European Commission. Volume 9A of the rules governing medicinal products in the European Union: guidelines on pharmacovigilance for medicinal products for human use. March 2007 [online]. Available from URL: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/pharmaceuticals/eudralex/vol-9/pdf/vol9A_2007–04.pdf [Accessed 2009 Jul 24]
  28. 28.
    Frank RG. Regulation of follow-on biologics. N Engl J Med 2007 Aug; 357(9): 841–3PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Baumann A. Early development of therapeutic biologicspharmacokinetics. Curr Drug Metab 2006 Jan; 7(1): 15–21PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hetland ML. DANBIO: a nationwide registry of biological therapies in Denmark. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2005 Sep–Oct; 23 (5 Suppl. 39): S205–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Bongartz T, Sutton AJ, Sweeting MJ, et al. Anti-TNF antibody therapy in rheumatoid arthritis and the risk of serious infections and malignancies: systematic review and meta-analysis of rare harmful effects in randomized controlled trials. JAMA 2006 May; 295(19): 2275–85PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use. Annex to guideline on similar biological medicinal products containing biotechnology-derived proteins as active substance: non-clinical and clinical issues. Guidance on similar medicinal products containing recombinant erythropoietins. London: European Medicines Agency, 2006 MarGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis Data Information BV 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thijs J. Giezen
    • 1
    • 2
  • Aukje K. Mantel-Teeuwisse
    • 1
    • 2
  • Hubert G. M. Leufkens
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences (UIPS), Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and PharmacotherapyUtrecht UniversityUtrechtthe Netherlands
  2. 2.Medicines Evaluation BoardThe Haguethe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations