Abstract
We explore differences between biosimilars and conventional small molecule pharmaceutical generic drugs with respect to development, regulatory requirements, legal challenges, pricing and related market dynamics over the product life cycle, and compare these dynamics in the U.S. and Europe. We also address issues concerning the development, manufacturing and marketing of biobetters as well as biosimilars. After identifying a number of measurement issues involving quantification of medicine utilization volumes, using IMS MIDAS™ data we quantify adoption of biosimilars in nine European countries between 2006 and 2012. We discuss factors affecting investment decisions among traditional novel pharmaceuticals, novel biologics, biosimilars and biobetters, and describe various strategies recently employed by biopharmaceutical firms. We conclude by considering issues involving immunogenicity of biologics, as well as controversies regarding whether biosimilars should have identical international non-proprietary names as the reference brand.
Ernst R. Berndt is the Louis E. Seley Professor in Applied Economics, and Mark R. Trusheim is Visiting Scientist, both at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Alfred P. Sloan School of Management, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Trusheim et al. (2010).
- 2.
Grabowski et al. (2011) define a complex small molecule as one meeting two or more of the following criteria: black box warning, narrow therapeutic index, prescribed by specialists, oncology products, or manufacturing technology that is available to only a limited number of firms. The more complex the drug, ceteris paribus, the fewer the number of generic entrants at the time of LOE. Olson and Wendling (2013) find that entry both during and after the 180-day exclusivity depends not only on pre-LOE market size, but also is greater if the drug at issue was originally designated a New Chemical Entity (NCE) by the Food and Drug Administration during the NDA approval process.
- 3.
IMS Institute for Healthcare Informatics (2011a), p. 21, and Aitken et al. (2013). Earlier studies include those by Hurwitz and Caves (1988), Ellison et al. (1997), Cook (1998), Reiffen and Ward (2005), Saha et al. (2006), Aitken et al. (2008), Aitken and Berndt (2011), Berndt and Aitken (2011) and Berndt and Newhouse (2012). Regarding complexity, as discussed in the previous endnote, Grabowski et al. (2011, pp. 540–541) report that “On average, drugs with two or more characteristics faced 2.5 geneic entrants 1 year following initial generic entry, while drugs with one or no complexity characteristics faced an average of 8.5 entrants.” Mean generic share of non-complex small molecules was 1.7 times larger than for complex small molecules, while the mean price discount from brand price was 1.6 times larger (price here reflecting manufacturer’s revenues from sales to wholesalers and direct customers).
- 4.
- 5.
- 6.
- 7.
Aitken et al. (2013).
- 8.
- 9.
- 10.
See Aitken et al. (2008) for details.
- 11.
- 12.
IMS Institute for Healthcare Informatics (2011a, p. 21).
- 13.
IMS Institute for Healthcare Informatics (2014, p. 40).
- 14.
- 15.
- 16.
According to the FDA (2014b, p. 15), biosimilarity means that “the biological product is highly similar to the reference product notwithstanding minor differences in clinically inactive components,” and that “there are no clinically meaningful differences between the biological product and the reference product in terms of the safety, purity and potency of the product.” Regarding interchangeability decisions, in the same FDA (2014b, pp. 5–6) document, draft guidance specified four possible process decision outcomes: definitely not interchangeable; might be interchangeable if enough clinical and analytical data to support it is developed; looks like it is interchangeable but needs more clinical and analytical data to support it; and biosimilar is a “fingerprint” of the innovator product, as demonstrated by analytical data, and no further clinical data is required.
- 17.
Trusheim et al. (2010).
- 18.
Leeson (2012).
- 19.
Schellekens (2005).
- 20.
Ziegler and Santagostino (2011).
- 21.
Kelley (2009).
- 22.
Morrow (2006).
- 23.
European Medicines Agency (2005).
- 24.
The product-specific biosimilar guidelines include recombinant erythropoietins, low-molecular-weight heparins, recombinant interferon alpha, recombinant granulocyte-colony stimulating factor, somatropin, recombinant human insulin, and monoclonal antibodies. See European Medicines Agency (2006a, b, c, 2009a, b, 2010, 2012a, b, c).
- 25.
- 26.
European Medicines Agency (2013a).
- 27.
European Medicines Agency (2013a, p. 4). BioPartners’ Valtropin was approved by the EU on the same day as Sandoz’ Omnitrope with Humatrope as the reference product, but Valtropin has not been marketed.
- 28.
European Medicines Agency (2012b).
- 29.
European Medicines Agency (2012b).
- 30.
Ehmann (2010).
- 31.
European Commission (2013, p. 27).
- 32.
- 33.
Grabowski et al. (2013, p. 3).
- 34.
- 35.
Conti and Berndt (2014).
- 36.
- 37.
From email correspondence with Terry McMonagle at the IMS Institute for Healthcare Informatics, September 4, 2013, 11:15 am.
- 38.
See footnote 37.
- 39.
See footnote 37.
- 40.
See Walsh (2013) for examples and discussion.
- 41.
- 42.
- 43.
The dollar and standard unit shares do not show complete concordance for Finland and Norway. The underlying IMS MIDAS data shows some minimal reference product dollar sales in spite of zero standard unit shipments. This could be due to reporting timing differences or other idiosyncratic causes affecting the very small values.
- 44.
We note, however, that in our nine country sample, for somatropin and filgrastim, only in Spain is dispensing limited to the hospital setting; in all other countries for these two molecules, dispensing occurs in both the hospital and retail setting. For erythropoietin alpha, in both Spain and Belgium dispensing occurs only in the hospital setting, and in all other countries dispensing takes place in both the hospital and retail settings.
- 45.
- 46.
European Commission (2013, pp. 32–33).
- 47.
As quoted in FiercePharma (2014).
- 48.
Staton (2014).
- 49.
Staton (2014).
- 50.
Karst (2013b),
- 51.
As quoted in Berkrot (2013).
- 52.
See footnote 51.
- 53.
See footnote 51.
- 54.
- 55.
As quoted in Carroll (2011).
- 56.
Carroll (2013c).
- 57.
McBride (2012).
- 58.
McBride (2013).
- 59.
Palmer (2013).
- 60.
As quoted in pmlive.com (2013).
- 61.
Gardner (2013).
- 62.
DiMaisi et al. (2003).
- 63.
DiMasi and Grabowski (2007).
- 64.
Trusheim et al. (2011).
- 65.
Trusheim and Berndt (2012).
- 66.
Baird et al. (2013).
- 67.
According to Brennan (2014), as of June 2014 24 countries have established biosimilar pathways or have approved follow-on biologics.
- 68.
Epoietinalfa, June 24, 2011 Division Director Summary Review, STN BL 103234/5166, p. 5 of 38. Available online at Drugs@FDA.
- 69.
Grabowski et al. (2013, p. 4).
- 70.
IMS Health (2011), slides 10, 11 and 40.
- 71.
Drug Facts and Comparisons (2011), p. 154.
- 72.
Grabowski (2013, slide 5).
- 73.
Genotropin, FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Application Number 20-280/S-031, Review—Administrative Documents, dated July 23, 2001. Available online at Drugs@FDA, Approval History, NDA 020280, 07/25/2001 031, p. 1 of 3, letter from David G. Orloff, M.D., Director, Division of Metabolic and Endocrine Drug Products to file NDA 20-280/S-031.
- 74.
“Somatropin”, Drug Facts and Comparisons (2011), pp. 523–526.
- 75.
Genotropin Draft Package Insert, p. 3of 15, NDA 20-280/S-031, available online at Drugs@FDA, Approval History, NDA 020280, 07/25/2001.
- 76.
IMS Health (2011), slide 41.
- 77.
Neupogen, “Review and Summary Basis of Approval”, Application Number 103353/000, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, February 20, 1991. “Supplement 1036, Letter, April 2, 1998. Available online at Drugs@FDA.
- 78.
“Filgrastim”, Drug Facts and Comparisons (2011), p. 163.
- 79.
“Neutropenia”, in White Blood Cell Disorders, ch. 158, in Robert Berkow, Editor, The Merck Manual of Medical Information, (Home Edition), Whitehouse Station, NJ: Merck Research Laboratories, 1998, pp. 761–763.
- 80.
“Neupogen (Filgrastim) Drug Information: User Reviews, Drug Side Effects…”, p. 1 of 3 in RxList…, last reviewed June 4, 2012. b Available online at http://www.rxlist.com/neupogen-drug.htm.
- 81.
Kim et al. (2003), p. 1 of 14.
- 82.
- 83.
“Pegfilgrastim”, Drug Facts and Comparisons (2011), p. 166.
- 84.
“Ankylosing spondylitis” in Anderson et al. (1998), pp. 94–95.
- 85.
Drug Facts and Figures (2011), pp. 2822–2823.
- 86.
“Folliropin Alpha” Drug Facts and Comparisons (2009), p. 350.
- 87.
European Medicines Agency (2013c).
- 88.
Food and Drug Administration (2014a).
References
Aitken ML, Berndt ER (2011) Medicare part D at age five: what has happened to seniors’ prescription drug prices? Report by the IMS Institute for Healthcare Bioinformatics, July
Aitken ML, Berndt ER, Cutler DM (2008) Prescription drug spending trends in the U.S. Looking beyond the turning point. Health Aff 28(1):W151–W160
Aitken ML, Berndt ER, Bosworth M, Cockburn IM, Frank RG, Kleinrock M, Shapiro BT (2013) The regulation of prescription drug competition and market responses: patterns in prices and sales following loss of exclusivity. Working Paper 19487, October. National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge
Anderson KN, Anderson LE, Glanze WD (eds) (1998) Mosby’s medical, nursing, & allied health dictionary, 5th edn. Mosby-Year Book, St. Louis
Baird Lynn G, Trusheim MR, Eichler H-G, Berndt ER, Hirsh G (2013) Comparison of stakeholder metrics for traditional and adpative development and licensing approaches to drug development. Ther Innov Regulat Sci 47(4):474–483
Berkrot B (2013) UPDATE 3—Amgen biosimilar push takes aim at blockbusters, 7 February. http://uk.reuters.com/assets/print?aid=UKL1NOB72N220130207. Accessed 8 Feb 2013
Berndt ER, Aitken ML (2011) Brand loyalty, generic entry and price competition in pharmaceuticals in the quarter century after the 1984 Waxman-Hatch legislation. Int J Econ Busi 18(2):203–224
Berndt ER, Dubois P (2012) Cross-national trends in the daily cost of pharmaceutical treatments, 2004–2010. Discussion Paper No. 9140, September. Center for Economic Policy Research, London. www.cepr.org/poubs/dps/DP9140.asp
Berndt ER, Newhouse JP (2012) Pricing and reimbursement in us pharmaceutical markets. In: Danzon PM, Nicholson S (eds) The oxford handbook of the economics of the biopharmaceutical industry. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 201–265
Berndt ER, Mortimer R, Bhattacharjya A, Parece A, Tuttle E (2007) Authorized generic drugs, price competition, and consumers’ welfare. Health Aff 26:790–799
Biotechnology Industry Organization (2013) BIO principles on patient safety in the substitution of biologic products, press release, 24 January. http://www.bio.org/advocacy/letters/bio-principles-patient-safety-substitution-biologic-prod
Branstetter LG, Chatterjee C, Higgins MJ (2011) Regulation and welfare: evidence from paragraph IV generic entry in the pharmaceutical industry, Working Paper 19487, October. National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge
Brennan Z (2014) Global biosimilar regulations diverging, experts say. BioPharma Reporter.com, 20 June. http://www.biopharma-reporter.com/content/view/print/933696
Calfee JE, DuPre E (2006) The emerging market dynamics of targeted therapeutics. Health Aff 25(5):1302–1308
Carroll J (2011) Biogen Idec signs up with Samsung on $300 million biosimilars venture. FierceBiotech, 6 December. http://www.fiercebiotech.com/story/biogen-idec-signs-samsung-300-million-biosimilars-v. Accessed 18 April 2014
Carroll J (2013a) Star-crossed Merck reorganizes troubled biosimilars effort around Samsung pact. FierceBiotech, 20 February. http://www.fiercebiotech.com/story/star-crossed-merck-reorganizes-troubled-biosimilars. Accessed 18 April 2014
Carroll J (2013b) Biosimilars face big delays as blockbuster knockoffs hit a roadblock. FierceBiotech, 27 February. http://www.fiercebiotech.com/story/biosimilars-face-big-delays-blockbuster-knockoffs-hit. Accessed 18 April 2014
Carroll J (2013c) Biogen Idec preps for a big leap into the anti-TNF blockbuster biosimilars market. FierceBiotech, Story 3, 17 December 2013. www.fiercebiotech.com
Congressional Budget Office (2008) Biologics price competition and innovation act of 2007, S.1695
Conti RM, Berndt ER (2014) Specialty drug prices and utilization after loss of U.S. Patent exclusivity, 2001–2007. Working Paper 20016, March. National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge
Cook A (1998) How increased competition from generic drugs has affected prices and returns in the pharmaceutical industry. The Congress of the United States, Congressional Budget Office, Washington DC. http://www.cbo.gov/
Danzon PM, Furukawa MF (2011) Cross-national evidence on generic pharmaceuticals: Pharmacy vs. physician-driven markets. Working Paper 17226, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge
DiMaisi JA, Hansen RW, Grabowski HG (2003) The price of innovation: new estimates of drug development costs. J Health Econ 22:151–185
DiMasi JA, Grabowski HG (2007) The cost of biopharmaceutical R&D: is biotech different? Manage Decis Econ 28:469–479
Drake KM, Starr MA, McGuire TG (2014) Do ‘reverse payment’ settlements of brand-generic pharmaceutical patent disputes constitute an anticompetitive pay-for-delay. Paper presented at the ASHEcon Fifth Biennial Meetings, Los Angeles, 23 June. www.gma-us.com
Drug Channels (2011) Ranbaxy makes three: the battle for generic lipitor profits, 1 December. http://www.drugchannels.net/2011//12/ranbaxy-makes-three-battle-for-generic.html
Drug Channels (2012) Pfizer’s lipitor strategy and the 2012 generic monster, 15 March. http://www.drugchannels.net/2012/03/pfizers-lipitor-strategy-and-2012.html
Drug Facts and Comparisons (2009) 2009 Edition. Wolters Kluwer Health, St. Louis MO
Drug Facts and Comparisons (2011) 2011 Edition. Wolters Kluwer Health, St. Louis MO
Ehmann F (2010) Biosimilars—regulation strategies and pathway in the EU (and U.S.). http://www.dvfa.de/files/die_dvfa/kommissionen/life_science/application/pdf/2_Falk_Ehmann_EMEA.pdf
Ellison SF, Cockburn IM, Griliches Z, Hausman JA (1997) Characteristics of demand for pharmaceutical products: an examination of four cephalosporins. RAND J Econ 28(3):426–446
European Commission (2013) What you need to know about Biosimilar Medicinal Products. Consensus Information Paper, Enterprise and Industry. http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/healthcare/competitiveness/process_on_corporate_responsibility/platform_access/index_en.htm#h2-6
European Medicines Agency (2005) Guideline on similar biological medicinal products, Committee for medicinal products for human use (CHMP), 30 October. EMA/CHMP/437/04. http://www.emea.eu.int
European Medicines Agency (2006a) 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 granulocyte-colony stimulating factor. EMEA Document Number CHMP/31329/2005, 22 February. http://www.emea.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2009/09/WC500003955.pdf
European Medicines Agency (2006b) 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 human soluble insulin. EMEA Document Number CHMP/32775/05, 22 February. http://www.emea.europa/eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guidelines/2009/09/WD500003957.pdf
European Medicines Agency (2006c) 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 somatropin. EMEA Document Number CHMP/94528/2005, 22 February. http://www.emea.europa/eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guidelines/2009/09/WD500003956.pdf
European Medicines Agency (2009a) Guideline on clinical and non-clinical development of similar biological medicinal products containing low-molecular-weight Heparin. EMEA Document Number CHMP/BMWP/118264/07, 16 March. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2009/09/WC500003927.pdf
European Medicines Agency (2009b) Non-clinical clinical development of similar biological medicinal products containing recombinant interferon alfa. EMEA Document Number CHMP/BMWP/102046/2006, 23 April. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2009/09/WC500003930.pdf
European Medicines Agency (2010) Guideline on similar biological medicinal products containing monoclonal antibodies (Draft), 18 November. EMEA Document Number CHMP/BMWP/403543/2010. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2010/11/WC50009936.pdf (Circulated November 2010 and comment period closed May 2011)
European Medicines Agency (2011a) Guideline on non-clinical and clinical development of similar biological medicinal products containing low-molecular-weight Heparin. EMEA Document Number CHMP/BMWP/118264/07, 16 March. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2009/09/WC500003927.pdf
European Medicines Agency (2011b) Guideline on non-clinical and clinical development of similar biological medicinal products containing recombinant human follicle stimulation hormone (r-hFSH). EMEA Document Number CHMP/BMWP/671292/2010, 17 November. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2011/11/WC500117986.pdf (Circulated November 2011 and comment period closed May 2012)
European Medicines Agency (2011c) Guideline on similar biological medicinal products containing interferon beta, 15 December. EMEA Document Number CHMP/BMWP/652000/2010. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2012/01/WC500120652.pdf (Circulated December 2010 and comment period closed May 2012)
European Medicines Agency (2012a) Work plan for the biosimilar medicinal products. Working Party 2013, Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP), 13 December. EMA/CHMP/BMWP/610801/2012. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Work_programme/2009/11/WC500014447.pdf
European Medicines Agency (2012b) Marvel LifeSciences Ltd withdraws its marketing authorization applications for Solumarv, Isomarv and Combimarv, Press release, 27 November. EMA/747975/2012. http://www.ema.europa.eu/ema/index.jsp?curl=pages/news_and_events/news/2012/11/news_detail_001665.jsp&mid=WC0b01ac058004d5c1
European Medicines Agency (2012c) Guidelines on similar biological medicinal products containing monoclonal antibodies – non-clinical and clinical issues. Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP), 30 May. EMA/CHMP/BMWP/403543/2010. http://www.emea.eu.int
European Medicines Agency (2013a) European medicines agency recommends approval of first two monoclonal antibodies, Press release, 13 December. EMA/390722/2013. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Press_release/2013/06/WC500144941.pdf
European Medicines Agency (2013b) Gastofil summary of opinion, 25 July. EMA/CHMP/304525/2013. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Summary_of_opinion_-_Initial_authorisation/human/002150/WC500146600.pdf
European Medicines Agency (2013c) Ovaleap: EPAR-product information, 23 October, 2013. http://www.ema.europa.eu/ema/index.jsp?curl=pages/medicines/human/medicines/002608/human_med_001689.jsp&mid=WC0b01ac058001d124and, http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/EPAR_-_Product_Information/human/002608/WC500152906.pdf
European Medicines Agency (2014) European public assessment reports, Internet reporting system, 18 April, EMA/390722/2013. http://www.ema.europa.eu/ema/index.jsp?curl=pages%2Fmedicines%2Flanding%2Fepar_search.jsp&murl=menus%2Fmedicines%2Fmedicines.jsp&mid=WC0b01ac058001d124&searchTab=searchByAuthType&alreadyLoaded=true&isNewQuery=true&status=Authorised&status=Withdrawn&status=Suspended&status=Refused&keyword=Enter+keywords&searchType=name&taxonomyPath=&treeNumber=&searchGenericType=biosimilars&genericsKeywordSearch=Submit
Federal Trade Commission (2002) Generic drug entry prior to patent expiration: an FTC study, July. http://www.ftc.gov/os/2002/07/genericdrugstudy.pdf
Federal Trade Commission (2011) Authorized generic drugs: short-term effects and long-term impact, August. http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2011/08/genericdrugs.shtm
FiercePharma.com (2014) As biosims win nods in Europe and India, debate over naming rights heats up. Story #4, January 29, 2014. www.fiercepharma.com
Food and Drug Administration (2014a) Approved labelling, Gonal-F, follitropinalfa. Available at http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/nda/2004/021684s000_Gonal-F_Rtt_Pen_Prntlbl.pdf
Food and Drug Administration (2014b) Draft guidance for industry: clinical pharmacology data to support a demonstration of biosimilarity to a reference product. Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research. http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatory Information/Guidances/default.htm
Gardner J (2013) Biosimilar battle emerges as Teva cues up Neupogen rival. 24 October. http://www.epvantage.com/Universal?View.aspx?type=Story&id=464236. Accessed 18 April 2014
Generic Pharmaceutical Association (2013) Generic industry by the numbers. Generic Pharmaceutical Association 2012 Annual Report. www.gphaonline.org
Grabowski HG (2013) How will US market for biosimilars evolve? Powerpoint presentation at Bates White LLC, Washington DC, 10 June
Grabowski HG, Kyle MK (2007) Generic competition and market exclusivity period in pharmaceuticals. Manage Decis Econ 28:491–502
Grabowski HG, Cockburn IM, Long G et al (2007a) The effect on federal spending of legislation creating a regulatory framework for follow-on biologics: key issues and assumptions. Unpublished white paper, August. http://public.econ.duke.edu/Papers//PDF/0907_H_Grabowski_I_Cockburn_G_Long_et_al_Effect_on_Federal_Spending_of_Follow_on_Biologics.pdf
Grabowski HG, Ridley DB, Schulman KA (2007b) Entry and competition in generic biologics. Manage Deci Econ 28:439–451
Grabowski HG, Long G, Mortimer R (2011b) Implementation of the biosimilar pathway: economic and policy issues. Seton Hall Law Rev 41(2):511–557
Grabowski HG, Long G, Mortimer R (2013) Biosimilars. In: Danzon P (ed) Encyclopedia of health economics. Elsevier, New York, www.analysisgroup.com
Grabowski HG, Guha R, Brain C, Taub A (2014) Pharmaceutical patent challenges and their implications for innovation and generic competition. Powerpoint presentation given at the ASHEcon Fifth Biennial Conference, Los Angeles, June 23. www.econ.duke.edu
Hemphill CS, Sampat BN (2012) Evergreening, patent challenges, and effective market life in pharmaceuticals. J Health Econ 31:327–339
Hurwitz MA, Caves RE (1988) Persuasion or information? Promotion and the shares of brand name and generic pharmaceuticals. J Law Econ 31:299–320
IMS Health (2011) Biosimilar accessible market: size and biosimilar penetration. Powerpoint presentation prepared for EFPIA-EGA-EuropaBio, December
IMS Institute for Healthcare Informatics (2011a) The use of medicines in the United States: review of 2010, April
IMS Institute for Healthcare Informatics (2011b) The global use of medicines: outlook through 2015, May
IMS Institute for Healthcare Informatics (2014) Medicine use and shifting costs of healthcare: a review of the use of medicines in the United States in 2013, April
International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers & Associations (2006) Measuring trends in pharmaceutical consumption: what do we want to measure and why? Powerpoint presentation and CD-ROM of Workshop, International Conference Centre, Geneva, 17 March. www.ifpma.org
Karst KR (2013a) The biosimilars state legislation scorecard. FDA Law Blog, 5 September. www.hpm.com
Karst KR (2013b) Amgen advocates for distinguishable non-proprietary names in substantial comments to GPhA and Novartis biosimilar naming citizen petitions. FDA Law Blog, 22 December. www.hpm.com
Kelley B (2009) Industrialization of mAb production technology. MAbs 1(5):443–452
Kim H, Park SK, Suh O-K, Oh JM (2003) Comparison of lenograstim and filgrastim on haematological effects after autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation with high-dose chemotherapy. Curr Med Res Opin 19(8):14
King R (Guy) (2007) Modeling federal cost savings of follow-on biologics. Avalere Health. http://www.avalerehealth.net/research/docs/Follow_on_Biologic_Modeling_Framework.pdf
Kulkarni K, Foy H (2012) Pfizer scraps insulin deal with India’s Biocon. Reuters Business & Financial News, Breaking US & International News, 13 March 2012. http://www.reuters.com/assets/print?aid=USBRE82C05920120313
Leeson P (2012) Drug discovery: chemical beauty contest. Nature 481:455–456. doi:10.1038/481455a
McBride R (2012) Report: Samsung stung with delay on Rituxan biosimilar. Fierce Biotech, 17 October. http://www.fiercebiotech.com/story/report-samsung-stung-delay-rituxan-biosiimilar. Accessed 20 April 2014
McBride R (2013) UPDATE: Roche sees another Rituxan biosimilar trial bite the dust. Fierce Biotech, 18 April. http://www.fiercebiotech.com/story/roches-sees-another-rituxan-biosimilar-bite-dust/. Accessed 20 April 2014
Miller S, Houts J (2007) Potential savings of biogenerics in the United States: executive summary. Express Scripts, February. http://www.express-scripts.com/research/studies/pharmacybenefitresearch/specialtypharmacyservices/docs/potentialSavingsBiogenericsUS.pdf
Morrow KJ (2006) Disposable bioreactors gaining favour: new components and systems improve process reliability and reduce cost. Gen Eng News 26(12):42–45
Olson LM, Wendling BW (2013) The effect of generic drug competition on generic drug prices during the Hatch-Waxman 180-day exclusivity period. Working Paper No. 317, April. Federal Trade Commission, Bureau of Economics, Washington DC. www.ftc.gov
Palmer E (2013) UPDATED: Samsung will make some Roche bioilogics. FiercePharma Manufacturing, 23 October. http://www.fiercepharmamanufacturing.com/story/samsoung-will-make-some-roche-biologi. Accessed 20 April 2014
Pmlive.com (2013) Lonza ends biosimilars deal with Teva. pmlive.com/pharma_news/lonza_ends_biosimilar_deal_with_teva_492305. Accessed 18 April 2014
Reiffen DE, Ward ME (2005) Generic drug industry dynamics. Rev Econ Stat 87(1):37–49
Reiffen DE, Ward ME (2007) ‘Branded Generics’ as a strategy to limit cannibalization of pharmaceutical markets. Manage Decis Econ 28:251–265
Rovira J, Espin J, Garcia L, de Labry AO (2011) The impact of biosimilars entry in EU markets. Andalusian School of Public Health. http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/healthcare/files/docs/biosimilars_market_012011_en.pdf
Saha A, Grabowski HG, Birnbaum HM, Greenberg PE, Bizan O (2006) Generic competition in the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. Int J Econ Bus 13(1):15–38
Schellekens H (2005) Follow-on biologics: challenges of the ‘next generation’. Nephrol Dial Transplant 20(Suppl 4):iv31–iv36. doi:10.1093/ndt/gfh1085
Schneider CK, Borg JJ, Falk E et al (2012) In support of the European Union biosimilar framework. Nat Biotechnol 30(8):745–748
Scientia Advisors (2010) ScientiaBiosimilar Webinar, 7 July. www.scientiaadv.com
Scott Morton F (1999) Entry decisions in the generic pharmaceutical industry. RAND J Econ 30:421–440
Scott Morton F (2000) Barriers to entry, brand advertising and generic entry in the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. Int J Indust Organ 18:1085–1104
Senior M (2009) European biosimilars’ market performance mirrors U.S. legislative progress: slow but steady. BioPharma Today, 19 May. http://www.biopharmatoday.com/2009/05/european-biosimilars-market-performance-mirrors-us-legislative-progress-slow-but-steady-.html
Somers J (2010) Effects of using generic drugs on medicare’s prescription drug spending. The Congress of the United States, Congressional Budget Office, Washington DC, September. http://www.cbo.gov/
Staton T (2014) PBMs join chorus of support for easy names on biosimilar drugs. Fierce Pharma, 3 July. fiercepharma.com
Trusheim MR, Berndt ER (2012) Economic challenges and possible policy actions to advance stratified medicine. Pers Med 9(4):413–427
Trusheim MR, Aitken ML, Berndt ER (2010) Characterizing markets for biopharmaceutical innovations: do biologics differ from small molecules? Forum for Health Economics & Policy, Manuscript 1200, June, p 48. http://www.bepress.com/fhep
Trusheim MR, Burgess B, Hu SX, Long T et al (2011) Quantifying factors for the success of stratified medicine. Nat Rev Drug Discov 10:817–833
Walsh K (2013) Biosimilars’ utilization and the role payers do play in driving uptake in Europe: an industry perspective. Powerpoint presentation given at the Biosimilar Medicines 11th EGA International Symposium, April. http://www.sandoz-biosimilars.com/cs/www.sandoz-biosimilars.com-v3/assets/media/shared/documents/presentations
Wang X (2012) Understanding current trends and outcomes in generic drug patent litigation: an empirical investigation. Unpublished Masters’ honors thesis, Stanford University: Public Policy Program, May
Wiggins SN, Maness R (2004) Price competition in pharmaceuticals: the case of anti-infectives. Econ Inq 42(2):247–263
World Health Organization (2003) Introduction to drug utilization research. Collaborating Center for Drug Statistics Methodology, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway. http://www.whocc.no/use_of_atc_ddd. Accessed 27 June 2011
World Health Organization (2009) DDD: definition and general considerations. Collaborating Center for Drug Statistics Methodology, Norwegian institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway, last updated 17 December 2009. http://www.whocc.no/ddd/definition_and_general_considera/. Accessed 27 June 2011
World Health Organization (2011) Use of ATC/DDD. Collaborating Center for Drug Statistics Methodology, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway, last updated 15 February 2011. http://www.whocc.no/use_of_atc_ddd. Accessed 27 June 2011
Wosinska M, Huckman RS (2004) Generic dispensing and substitution in mail and retail pharmacies. Health Affairs Web Excl W4-409 to W4-416, posted 28 July 2004. www.healthaffairs.org (An abstract of the article was published in the hardcopy edition of Health Affairs 23(5):284, September/October 2004)
Ziegler M, Santagostino A (2011) Manufacturing drives value in biopharmaceuticals. Pharma Manufacturing. http://www.pharmamanufacturing.com/articles/2011/085.html
Acknowledgements
The research reported on here was funded by an educational grant from Pfizer Limited, Surrey, UK to Berndt Associates LLC. The funding source had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, or interpretation of the data; and while it provided comments on a draft version of this manuscript, it had no role in the preparation, review, submission, or approval of the manuscript for publication. The authors thank Kirsten Axelsen, Adam Heathfield, Jake Lebiecki and Danielle Rollman of Pfizer for comments on an earlier draft of this manuscript, and participants at the TIGER Forum 2014 at the Toulouse School of Economics in Toulouse, France, June 2, 2014. The statements, findings, conclusions, views, and opinions contained and expressed herein are those of the authors and are based in part on IMS MIDAS™ data obtained by Berndt Associates LLC under license from IMS Health (rights reserved), and are not necessarily those of IMS Health, its affiliates or subsidiaries, or the institutions with whom the authors are affiliated. Any errors or misstatements are our own.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendix
Appendix
Biologic Molecules with Biosimilar Entry in Europe and Elsewhere
Short-Acting Epoietin Recombinant (Erythropoietin, Alpha, Beta, Theta, Zeta)
According to the US Food and Drug Administration, “Erythropoietin is a glycoprotein whose main function is to stimulate the proliferation and differentiation of erythroid precursors in the bone marrow. Erythropoietin is produced mainly in the kidneys, though several other tissues produce lesser amounts of the growth factor.”Footnote 68 Approved by the FDA on June 1, 1989, Epogen/Procrit (epoetinalfa) was produced in Chinese Hamster Ovary cells that have modified through recombinant DNA technology to encode the gene for human erythropoietin, and was initially approved for the treatment of anemia in patients with chronic renal failure. Epogen/Procrit was subsequently approved for the treatment of anemia due to ziduvodine therapy in HIV-infected patients (1991) and for the treatment of anemia in patients with non-myeloid malignancies whose anemia is due to the effect of concomitantly administered chemotherapy (1993). Both these supplemental approvals were based on demonstration of a reduction in the proportion of patients receiving shaded blood cell (RBC) transfusions.
Within Europe, the epoietin alpha reference product is Johnson & Johnson’s Erypo or Eprex. As of June 2011, there were five approved biosimilar products: Binocrit (Sandoz/Novartis), Epo A (Hexal/Novartis), Abseamed (Medici), Retacrit (Hospira) and Silapo (Stada), all approved between August 28, 2007 and December 18, 2007.Footnote 69 Using the IMS Health classification scheme, there are two non-referenced products in the epoietin biosimilar accessible market (defined as an original product, granted market exclusivity at the start of its commercial life in Europe, whose exclusivity is now expired, with the product never have been referenced, or may have been referenced but the referencing biosimilar has not yet launched): Roche’s NeoRecormon, and Teva’s Eporatio/Biopoin.Footnote 70 In the U.S., in addition to having been approved by the FDA for treating anemia in cancer patients on chemotherapy, anemia in chronic renal failure patients, and anemia in zidovudine-treated, HIV-infected patients, epoietin alfa is approved for the reduction of allogenic blood transfusion in surgery patients. As of 2011, Epogen/Procrit was available in 2000, 3000 and 4000 units/ml 1 ml single-dose vials for subcutaneous injection or intravenous solution administration, in 20000 units/ml 1 ml multidose vials, in 10000 units/ml 1 ml single-dose and 2 ml multidose vials, and in 40000 units/ml single-dose vials for subcutaneous injection or intravenous solution administration.
Another erythropoietin stimulating agent (ESA) approved in both the US and EU is Amgen’s darbepoetin alfa (brand name Aranesp in the US). Darbepoietin is distinguished from epoietin agents primarily because of Aranesp’s longer serum half-life, implying generally less frequent dosing than the epoietins.Footnote 71 Currently Aranesp is patent-protected in the US and EU, with its earliest reported year of key US patent expiry being 2024; for Epogen this US patent expiry date is 2013.Footnote 72
Growth Hormone for Children Born Small for Gestational Age—SGA (Somatropin Molecule)
Of the approximately 2.5 % of children who are born small for gestational age (SGA), 10–15 % fail to “catch up” by age two. Children who do not catch up by age two, if left untreated, are destined in many cases to have compromised final height, relative to the norm for the population. A relative height measure is SDS—the number of standard deviations an individual at a particular age is away from the age-specific population mean. Though there are differences across and within countries on the measure of SDS triggering treatment, growth hormone supplementation in children born SGA can enhance growth velocity, height SDS, and predicted adult height. Aside from the known adverse effects of growth hormone therapy, of concern in treating these children is a risk of accelerating bone age beyond chronological age, with the possibility of precipitating precocious puberty and compromising final stature on that basis.Footnote 73
On August 24, 1995, the FDA approved Pharmacia and Upjohn’s NDA # 020280 application for Genotropin (somatropin recombinant) for children born SGA who fail to manifest catch-up growth by 2 years of age, caused by an inadequate secretion of endogenous growth hormone. Over the years the FDA has approved a number of supplemental indications (e.g., growth failure associated with chronic renal insufficiency, with Noonan syndrome, with Prader-Willi syndrome, with Turner syndrome, in adults with either adult- or childhood-onset growth hormone deficiency, and others) as well as several related somatropin products, such as Omnitrope (Sandoz), Serostim (Serono), Humatrope (Eli Lilly), Nutropin (Genentech), Salzen (Serono), Tev-Tropin (Gate), HumatroPen (Eli Lilly), Zorbtive (Serono), Norditropin (Novo Nordisk), Accretropin (Cangene), and Nutropin AQ, Nutropin AQ NuSpin 5, NuSpin 10 and NuSpin 20 (Genentech). Most of these formulations are subcutaneous injection, lyophilized power for solution, although some products, such as Norditropin, involve pen or two-chamber cartridge delivery systems, with a reconstitution device used to mix the diluent and powder.Footnote 74 Somatropin must not be injected intravenously. Genotropin lyophilized powder contains somatropin of rDNA origin, a polypeptide hormone. The amino acid sequence of the product is identical to that of human growth hormone of pituitary origin (somatropin). Genotropin is synthesized in a strain of Escherichia coli that has been modified by the addition of the gene for human growth hormone.Footnote 75
According to IMS Health, as of June 2011 both Pfizer’s (who acquired rights with the acquisition of Pharmacia and Upjohn) Genotropin and Eli Lilly’s Humatrope were reference products, the two approved biosimilar products were Novartis Sandoz’ Omnitrope and Somatropin (unknown manufacturing laboratory), whereas the non-referenced products included Sanofi Aventis’ Maxomat, Nova Nordisk’s Norditropin, Ipsen’s Nutropinaq, Merck Serono’s Saizen, and Ferring’s Zomacton.Footnote 76
Granulocyte-Colony Stimulating Factor (G-CSF), Filgrastim and Lenograstim Molecules
On February 20, 1991, the US FDA approved Amgen’s filgrastim (trade name Neupogen) to decrease the incidence of infection, as manifested in febrile neutropenia, in patients with non-myeloid malignancies receiving myelosuppressive anti-cancer drugs associated with a significant incidence of severe neutropenia with fever. On April 2, 1998, the FDA granted a supplemental NDA approval for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) adult patients receiving induction or consolidation chemotherapy, for reducing the time to neutrophil recovery and the duration of fever.Footnote 77 Other approvedFootnote 78 uses of filgrastim include in patients with nonmyeloid malignancies undergoing myeloablative chemotherapy followed by bone marrow transplantation, and for the mobilization of hematopoietic progenitor cells into the peripheral blood for collection by leukapheresis.
Neutropenia is condition with an abnormally low number of neutrophils in the blood—the body’s primary cellular defense system against bacteria and fungi. Neutrophils also help heal wounds and ingest foreign debris, such as embedded splinters. People who have severe neutropenia (fewer than 500 neutrophils per microliter of blood) can rapidly succumb to infection because their bodies lack the means to fight the invading organisms. Neutrophils mature in the bone marrow in about 2 weeks. After entering the blood stream, they circulate for about 6 h, searching for infective organisms and other intruders. When they find one, they migrate into the tissues, attach themselves to the intruders, and produce toxic substances that kill and digest the intruders. This reaction may damage healthy tissue in the area of the infection. The entire process produces an inflammatory response in the infected area, which appears on the body’s surface as redness, swelling, and heat. Neutropenia has several causes. The number of neutrophils can decrease because bone marrow production isn’t adequate or because large numbers of white blood cells are destroyed in the circulation. Aplastic anemia, and certain rare genetic diseases such as infantile genetic agranulocytosis and familial neutropenia cause decreases in the number of white blood cells. Certain drugs, especially chemotherapies used in cancer treatment, impair the bone marrow’s ability to produce neutrophils. Growth factors that stimulate the production of white blood cells, particularly granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) and granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) can eliminate neutropenic episodes in cyclic neutropenia.Footnote 79
In the U.S., Neupogen is still marketed exclusively by Amgen. Four dosage forms are approved—two in single use vials, and two as pre-filled injectable syringes. Neupogen is produced by Escherichia coli (E coli) bacteria into which has been inserted the human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor gene. The protein has an amino acid sequence that is identical to the natural sequence predicted from human DNA analysis, except for the addition of an N-terminal methionine necessary for expression in E coli. Because Neupogen is produced in E coli, the product is non-glycosylated and thus differs from G-CSF isolated from a human cell. Neupogen is a sterile, clear, colorless preservative-free liquid for parenteral administration. In order to maintain clinical benefit, chronic daily administration is required.Footnote 80
A second form of recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor is lenograstim (brand name Granocyte, Chugai Pharmaceuticals, marketed in the EU by Sanofi Aventis), a Chinese hamster ovary-derived G-CSF, indistinguishable from native G-CSF, and differing from filgrastim which is an Escherichica coli-derived G-CSF and is non-glycosylated, having an extra methionine group at the N-terminal end of the peptide chain.Footnote 81 Granocyte (lenograstim) is not available in the U.S., but is a non-referenced product in the EU, having brand names in addition to Sanofi Aventis’ Granocyte, Euprotin (Almirall), Myelostim (Italfarmaco) and Roche’s Neutrogin. As of June 2011, a number of biosimilars were approved in the EU using Amgen’s filgrastim (Neupogen) as the reference product. These biosimilars include a Biograstim (CT Arzzneimittel), Novartis’/Sandoz filgrastim Zarzio, Teva’s Tevagrastim, Ratiopharm’s Ratiograstim, Hexai’s Filgrastim Hexal, and Hospira’s Nivestim, all approved between September 15, 2008 and June 8, 2010.Footnote 82
Neulasta (pegfilgrastim) is a second-generation injectable granulocyte colony stimulating factor approved in both the US and EU. Pegfilgrastim is distinguished from filgrastim agents primarily because of pegfilgrastim’s longer serum half-life, implying generally less frequent dosing than the filgrastims. Specifically, whereas filgrastim requires daily dosing, pegfilgrastim is administered only once per chemotherapy cycle.Footnote 83 Currently Neulasta is patent-protected in the US and EU. According to Grabowski (2013, Slide 5), while the earliest reported year of key US patent expiry is 2013 for Amgen’s Neupogen, for its Neulasta it is 2015.
Infliximab (Remicade)
The EMA’s Committee on Human Medicinal Products (CHMP) approved Hospira’s biosimilar application for infliximab (injection) on September 10, 2013 with Centocor’s (Johnson & Johnson) Remicade serving as the reference product. Infliximib is a monoclonal antibody, an immunomodulator distributed as a lyophilized powder for solution. In the EU it is approved for treating ankylosing spondylitis (a chronic inflammatory disease of unknown origin, first affecting the spine and adjacent structures and commonly progressing to eventual fusion of the involved jointsFootnote 84), psoriatic arthritis and psoriasis (see Table 1 in main text). In addition to these three indications, in the U.S. infliximab (Remicade) is approved by the FDA for treatment of Crohn disease, fistulizing Crohn disease, rheumatoic arthritis, and ulcerative colitis.Footnote 85 Infliximab is the first monoclonal antibody approved as a biosimilar in the EU. Like several other immunologic agents, infliximab has a risk of serious infections, since patients treated with infliximab are at an increased risk for developing serious infections that may lead to hospitalization or death. According to Drug Facts and Figures (2011, p. 2822), “Most patients who developed those infections were taking concomitant immunosuppressants such as methotrexate or corticosteroids.”
Since EMA approval of biosimilar infliximab (referenced to Remicade) occurred just several months ago, data on its uptake within EU countries are not yet available. Indeed, it is likely that Hospira has not yet obtained reimbursement approval from any of the EMA member countries.
Follitropin Alfa (Gonal-F)
The EMA’s Committee on Human Medicinal Products (CHMP) approved Teva’s biosimilar application for follitropin alfa (injection) on September 27, 2013 with Merck Serono’s Gonal-F serving as the reference product. Follitropin alfa is a human follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) distributed as a sterile, clear solution for subcutaneous injection. In the EU it is approved for treating an ovulation (the failure of the ovaries to release an egg during an ovulation cycleFootnote 86), stimulation of multifollicular development in women undergoing superovulation for assisted reproductive technologies (ART) such as in vitro fertilization (IVF), gemete intra-fallopian transfer and zygote intra-fallopian transfer, and for ovaleap in association with a luteisising hormone (LH) preparation for women with severe LH and FSH deficiency. It is also approved in the EU for the stimulation of spermatogenesis in men who have congenital or acquired hypogonadotropic hypogonadism with concomitant human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) therapy.Footnote 87 In the U.S. follitropin alfa FDA approved indications are limited to an ovulation and ART treatments.Footnote 88 Follitropin alfa is the first fertility biosimilar approved in the EU.
Since EMA approval of biosimilar follitropin alfa (referenced to Gonal-F) occurred just several months ago, data on its uptake within EU countries are not yet available. Indeed, it is likely that Teva has not yet obtained reimbursement approval from any of the EMA member countries.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Berndt, E.R., Trusheim, M.R. (2015). Biosimilar and Biobetter Scenarios for the US and Europe: What Should We Expect?. In: Rosenberg, A., Demeule, B. (eds) Biobetters. AAPS Advances in the Pharmaceutical Sciences Series, vol 19. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2543-8_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2543-8_15
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4939-2542-1
Online ISBN: 978-1-4939-2543-8
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesBiomedical and Life Sciences (R0)