Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32990892›Full record

ReviewBioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy2020

Interchangeability of Biosimilars: What Level of Clinical Evidence is Needed to Support the Interchangeability Designation in the United States?

Daniel F Alvarez, Gertjan Wolbink, Carol Cronenberger, John Orazem, Jonathan Kay

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Observational
  18. Review
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Daniel F AlvarezInflammation and Immunology, Pfizer Inc, 500 Arcola Rd, Collegeville, PA, 19426, USA. Daniel.F.Alvarez@pfizer.com.
Gertjan WolbinkUniversity of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Carol CronenbergerClinical Pharmacology, Pfizer Inc, Collegeville, PA, USA.
John OrazemGlobal Biostatistics and Data Management, Pfizer Inc, New York, NY, USA.
Jonathan KayDepartments of Medicine and of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA, USA.
Pfizer (United States) · USUMass Memorial Medical Center · USUniversity of Amsterdam · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A biosimilar is a biologic drug that is "highly similar to a reference (originator) product, with no clinically meaningful differences between the two products in safety, purity, and potency". Regulatory approval of a biosimilar is based on analytical, structural, and functional comparisons with the reference product, comparative nonclinical (in vivo) studies, clinical pharmacokinetics and/or pharmacodynamics, and immunogenicity. In addition, comparative clinical efficacy and safety assessments are usually conducted and, taken together, comprise the "totality of the evidence" supporting biosimilarity. For a biosimilar to meet the additional designation of interchangeability in the United States (US), the applicant must demonstrate that the biological drug can be expected to produce the "same clinical result as the reference product in any given patient" and "if the biological drug is administered more than once to an individual, the risk in terms of safety or diminished efficacy of alternating or switching between the use of the biological drug and the reference product is no greater than the risk of using the reference product without such alternation or switch". The challenges faced in conducting clinical studies to support a designation of interchangeability, as defined in the final interchangeability guidance from the US Food and Drug Administration, are considered. Potential alternative approaches to generating adequate and sufficient clinical data to support a designation of interchangeability are also presented.

Indexed as

Biosimilar PharmaceuticalsDrug ApprovalHumansUnited StatesUnited States Food and Drug AdministrationBiosimilar Pharmaceuticals

Identifiers

PMID32990892
PMCPMC7669758
OpenAlexW3090605047

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.