ReviewEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2020
Clinical evidence supporting the marketing authorization of biosimilars in Europe.
Review in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Structural Characterization of Monoclonal Antibodies and Epitope Mapping by FFAP Footprinting.Analytical chemistry · 2024Article
- Patient-Reported Outcomes in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Key Consideration for Evaluating Biosimilar Uptake?Patient related outcome measures · 2022Review
- Equivalence and switching between biosimilars and reference molecules in rheumatoid arthritis: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.Systematic reviews · 2021Article
- Evolving Biosimilar Clinical Requirements: A Qualitative Interview Study with Industry Experts and European National Medicines Agency Regulators.BioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy · 2021Article
- Real-life drug persistence in patients with rheumatic diseases treated with CT-P13: a prospective observational cohort study (PERSIST).Rheumatology advances in practice · 2021Article
- Health technology assessment of biosimilars worldwide: a scoping review.Health research policy and systems · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo review the marketing authorization of biosimilars and provide a critical analysis of the pivotal trials supporting their approval by the European Medicines Agency (EMA).
methodsEMA website to identify the biosimilars approved up to July 2019 and the European Public Assessment Report for information on pivotal trial design, duration, intervention and control, primary outcome, data on immunogenicity, and comparability margins.
resultsThe EMA has approved 55 biosimilars (62% in 2017-2019) of 16 biologic products, used in several clinical indications. Some biosimilars were licensed as multiple products, with different commercial names, by the same or different companies. The comparability exercise and subsequent approval of 49/55 (89%) biosimilars were based on one or more pivotal phase III trials testing their clinical efficacy. In all, biosimilars were approved on the basis of 55 trials, mostly phase III (42/55, 76%) assessing clinical efficacy; these were mainly equivalence trials (31/55, 56%). The pivotal phase III trials assessed surrogate measures of clinical effect, and 71% reported immunogenicity data.
conclusionAnalysis of the approval of biosimilars in Europe depicts a complex and heterogeneous scenario. The requirement for showing similarity in terms of clinical efficacy and safety provides a robust demonstration of comparable clinical outcomes but lays a burden on biosimilar manufacturers and may delay the introduction of the drugs. The development, licensing, and monitoring of biosimilars would benefit from new strategies to accelerate access to these drugs while reducing uncertainties about their use in practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31897530What 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.