Batch-to-Batch Consistency of SB4 and SB2, Etanercept and Infliximab Biosimilars

Identification of Spectral Fingerprints in Different Batches of Antimalarial Herbal Drugs Using Laser-Induced Autofluorescence and Chemometric Techniques

Variability in antimalarial herbal drugs (AMHDs) poses a challenge to quality control and efficacy, especially in low-resource regions where malaria is prevalent. This study employs a non-destructive laser-induced autofluorescence (LIAF) technique combined with chemometrics to assess spectral fingerprint consistency across six (6) AMHD batches. The LIAF spectra reveal distinct Gaussian fluorescence profiles of secondary metabolites with associated specific fluorescence peaks. Results indicate a significant level of uniformity in metabolite composition with 99.46% and 98.67% averaged cosine similarity for intra-batch and inter-batch consistency respectively. This study characterized the spectral signature of batch-to-batch AMHDs, which manufacturers can leverage to prevent inconsistencies in AMHD production. These inconsistencies could potentially lead to counterfeiting and pose direct and indirect threats to public health, clinical care, and socio-economic development.

A Retrospective Analysis of the Potential Impact of Differences in Aggregates on Clinical Immunogenicity of Biosimilars and their Reference Products

Aggregates, in particular high molecular weight species (HMWs), have been linked to increased immunogenicity. The current understanding on the impact of HMWs is mainly based on in vitro and nonclinical studies and there are only limited data available associating differences in HMWs in marketed monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) to clinical outcomes. Biosimilars offer a unique opportunity to study the potential association between quality parameters and clinical outcomes. We performed a retrospective evaluation to investigate the association between HMW content and reported antidrug-antibody (ADA) incidence in 30 full-length biosimilar mAbs approved in the European Union and the United States. Information for HMW content and ADA incidence were collected from publicly available sources. Differences in HMW content between biosimilars and their reference products (RPs) ranged from -0.75 to 1.65% with slightly higher differences observed in antineoplastic products as compared with immunosuppressant products. The difference in the ADA incidence between the RP and the biosimilar for the programs studied ranged from -11.0 to 18.5%. No association was observed between differences in HMW content and reported ADA incidence, in neither phase I nor phase III studies. Our results show that the limited differences in the content of HMWs between marketed biosimilars and reference mAbs were not associated with differences in reported immunogenicity, determined as incidence of ADAs and neutralizing ADAs in comparative clinical studies.

Qualification of a LC-HRMS platform method for biosimilar development using NISTmab as a model

Biosimilars are a cost-effective alternative to biopharmaceuticals, necessitating rigorous analytical methods for consistency and compliance. Liquid chromatography coupled with high-resolution mass spectrometry (LC-HRMS) is a versatile tool for assessing key attributes, encompassing molecular mass, primary structure, and post-translational modifications (PTMs). Adhering to ICH Q2R1, we validated an LC-HRMS based peptide mapping method using NISTmab as a reference. The method validation parameters, covering system suitability, specificity, accuracy, precision, robustness, and carryover, were comprehensively assessed. The method effectively differentiated the NISTmab from similar counterparts as well as from artificially introduced spiked conditions. Notably, the accuracy of mass error for NISTmab specific complementarity determining region peptides was within a maximum of 2.42 parts per million (ppm) from theoretical and the highest percent relative standard deviation (%RSD) observed for precision was 0.000219 %. It demonstrates precision in sequence coverage and PTM detection, with a visual inspection of total ion chromatogram approach for variability assessment. The method maintains robustness when subjected to diverse storage conditions, encompassing variations in column temperature and mobile phase composition. Negligible carryover was noted during the carryover analysis. In summary, this method serves as a versatile platform for multiple biosimilar development by effectively characterizing and identifying monoclonal antibodies, ultimately ensuring product quality.

Biosimilar-to-Biosimilar Switching: What is the Rationale and Current Experience?

Over time, clinicians have become increasingly comfortable embracing the prescription of biosimilars-highly similar versions of innovator or reference biological agents-for their patients with inflammatory diseases. Although a switch from a reference product to a licensed biosimilar version (or vice versa) is a medical decision robustly supported by the stepwise accumulation of clinical trial evidence concerning comparable safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy between these products, a switch from one biosimilar to another biosimilar of the same reference product, or a cross-switch, is not. Similarity among biosimilars of a reference product is not a regulatory agency concern and therefore is unlikely to be investigated in randomized controlled trials in the foreseeable future. Yet in clinical practice, across a diverse range of patients, the option to cross-switch from one biosimilar to another can and does arise for valid reasons such as convenience or tolerability issues, or driven by third parties (e.g., payers). In the absence of clinical trial data, clinicians must attempt to objectively evaluate the emerging real-world cross-switching evidence within the context of what is known about the science underpinning a designation of biosimilar. That knowledge then needs to be integrated with what clinicians know about their patients and their disease on a case-by-case basis. This review aims to consolidate relevant emerging real-world data and other key information about biosimilar-to-biosimilar cross-switching for prescribing clinicians. In the absence of clear clinical guidelines addressing this topic at present, this review may serve to facilitate discretionary and educated treatment decision making.

A Systematic Review on Infliximab Biosimilar SB2: From Pre-Clinical Data to Real-World Evidence

INTRODUCTION

The infliximab biosimilar SB2 was approved in the EU (2016, Flixabi®) and the US (2017, Renflexis®) for the same indications as the reference product (Remicade®) based on a robust analytical and clinical data package.

AREAS COVERED

This systematic literature review summarizes available analytical and clinical data on SB2, including randomized controlled clinical trials and real-world evidence studies. Overall, 184 articles and congress abstracts were identified (excluding duplicates), whereof 5 reports on analytical data, four reports on two randomized controlled trials and 13 reports of real-world evidence studies were included.

EXPERT OPINION

The available analytical and clinical data support the equivalence of SB2 to the reference product across approved indications. This is further supported by emerging real-world evidence, particularly in extrapolated indications such as inflammatory bowel disease for both infliximab-naïve patients and patients already established on infliximab switching to SB2. Switching from originator or biosimilar infliximab to SB2 including both single and multiple switches was not associated with an increased risk of loss of treatment response or any safety or immunogenicity concerns. Overall, the approved infliximab biosimilar SB2 is safe and effective in clinical practice across licensed indications.

Type and Extent of Information on (Potentially Critical) Quality Attributes Described in European Public Assessment Reports for Adalimumab Biosimilars

Regulatory approval of biosimilars predominantly relies on biosimilarity assessments of quality attributes (QAs), particularly the potentially critical QAs (pCQAs) that may affect the clinical profile. However, a limited understanding exists concerning how EU regulators reflect the biosimilarity assessments of (pC)QAs in European public assessment reports (EPARs) by different stakeholders. The type and extent of information on QAs and pCQAs in EPARs were evaluated for seven adalimumab biosimilars. Seventy-seven QAs, including 31 pCQAs, were classified and assessed for type (structural and functional attributes) and extent (biosimilarity interpretation and/or test results) of information in EPARs. Reporting on the QAs (35–75%) varied between EPARs, where the most emphasis was placed on pCQAs (65–87%). Functional attributes (54% QAs and 92% pCQAs) were reported more frequently than structural attributes (8% QAs and 22% pCQAs). About 50% (4 structural and 12 functional attributes) of pCQAs were consistently reported in all EPARs. Regulators often provided biosimilarity interpretation (QAs: 83% structural and 80% functional; pCQAs: 81% structural and 78% functional) but rarely include test results (QAs: 1% structural and 9% functional and pCQAs: 3% structural and 9% functional). Minor differences in structural attributes, commonly in glycoforms and charge variants, were often observed in adalimumab biosimilars but did not affect the functions and clinical profile. Despite the variability in reporting QAs in EPARs, the minor observed differences were largely quantitative and not essentially meaningful for the overall conclusion of biosimilarity of the seven adalimumab biosimilars.