ArticleThe European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care2014
Statistical and regulatory considerations in assessments of interchangeability of biological drug products.
Article in The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Generic-reference and generic-generic bioequivalence of forty-two, randomly-selected, on-market generic products of fourteen immediate-release oral drugs.BMC pharmacology & toxicology · 2017Trial
- Does the placebo effect modulate drug bioavailability? Randomized cross-over studies of three drugs.Journal of negative results in biomedicine · 2017Trial
- 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.Annals of the rheumatic diseases · 2017Trial
- Efficacy and safety of switching from reference infliximab to CT-P13 compared with maintenance of CT-P13 in ankylosing spondylitis: 102-week data from the PLANETAS extension study.Annals of the rheumatic diseases · 2017Trial
- Interchangeability of Biosimilars: What Level of Clinical Evidence is Needed to Support the Interchangeability Designation in the United States?BioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy · 2020Review
- Review
- A Comprehensive Review on CopemylNeurology and therapy · 2017Review
- Review
- Safety, efficacy and immunogenicity of switching from innovator to biosimilar infliximab in patients with spondyloarthritis: a 6-month real-life observational study.Immunologic research · 2017Observational
- Clinical experience with infliximab biosimilar Remsima (CT-P13) in inflammatory bowel disease patients.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2016Review
- Biosimilars Are Here: A Hospital Pharmacist's Guide to Educating Health Care Professionals on Biosimilars.Hospital pharmacy · 2015Article
- Budget impact analysis of biosimilar infliximab (CT-P13) for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in six Central and Eastern European countries.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
When the patent of a brand-name, marketed drug expires, new, generic products are usually offered. Small-molecule generic and originator drug products are expected to be chemically identical. Their pharmaceutical similarity can be typically assessed by simple regulatory criteria such as the expectation that the 90% confidence interval for the ratio of geometric means of some pharmacokinetic parameters be between 0.80 and 1.25. When such criteria are satisfied, the drug products are generally considered to exhibit therapeutic equivalence. They are then usually interchanged freely within individual patients. Biological drugs are complex proteins, for instance, because of their large size, intricate structure, sensitivity to environmental conditions, difficult manufacturing procedures, and the possibility of immunogenicity. Generic and brand-name biologic products can be expected to show only similarity but not identity in their various features and clinical effects. Consequently, the determination of biosimilarity is also a complicated process which involves assessment of the totality of the evidence for the close similarity of the two products. Moreover, even when biosimilarity has been established, it may not be assumed that the two biosimilar products can be automatically substituted by pharmacists. This generally requires additional, careful considerations. Without declaring interchangeability, a new product could be prescribed, i.e. it is prescribable. However, two products can be automatically substituted only if they are interchangeable. Interchangeability is a statistical term and it means that products can be used in any order in the same patient without considering the treatment history. The concepts of interchangeability and prescribability have been widely discussed in the past but only in relation to small molecule generics. In this paper we apply these concepts to biosimilars and we discuss: definitions of prescribability and interchangeability and their statistical implementation; the relation between bioequivalence and interchangeability for small-molecule drug products; regulatory requirements and expectations of biosimilar products in various jurisdictions; possible statistical approaches to establish the similarity and interchangeability of biologic drug products; definition of other technical terms such as switchability and automatic substitution. The paper will be concluded with a discussion of the anticipated future use of interchangeability of biological drug products.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.