[Regulatory aspects of biosimilars. Myths and facts]

BACKGROUND

Biosimilars are currently a hot topic and there are many unsolved questions, misunderstandings and sometimes considerable uncertainty, especially among clinicians and patients. Regulatory agencies, such as the European Medicines Agency (EMA) issue guidelines for the development and approval of biosimilars, which are based on scientific principles.

OBJECTIVE

This article addresses some of the frequently noted misunderstandings and misperceptions. For example, why biosimilars are (or can only be) "similar" but not "identical" compared to the original pharmaceutical product, and aspects, such as the pharmaceutical quality of biosimilars, immunogenicity and the approval process for biosimilars are highlighted.

Assessment and reporting of the clinical immunogenicity of therapeutic proteins and peptides-harmonized terminology and tactical recommendations

Immunogenicity is a significant concern for biologic drugs as it can affect both safety and efficacy. To date, the descriptions of product immunogenicity have varied not only due to different degrees of understanding of product immunogenicity at the time of licensing but also due to an evolving lexicon that has generated some confusion in the field. In recent years, there has been growing consensus regarding the data needed to assess product immunogenicity. Harmonization of the strategy for the elucidation of product immunogenicity by drug developers, as well as the use of defined common terminology, can benefit medical practitioners, health regulatory agencies, and ultimately the patients. Clearly, understanding the incidence, kinetics and magnitude of anti-drug antibody (ADA), its neutralizing ability, cross-reactivity with endogenous molecules or other marketed biologic drugs, and related clinical impact may enhance clinical management of patients treated with biologic drugs. To that end, the authors present terms and definitions for describing and analyzing clinical immunogenicity data and suggest approaches to data presentation, emphasizing associations of ADA development with pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and safety that are necessary to assess the clinical relevance of immunogenicity.

Establishment of the first international repository for transfusion-relevant bacteria reference strains: ISBT working party transfusion-transmitted infectious diseases (WP-TTID), subgroup on bacteria

BACKGROUND

Bacterial contamination of platelet concentrates (PCs) still remains a significant problem in transfusion with potential important clinical consequences, including death. The International Society of Blood Transfusion Working Party on Transfusion-Transmitted Infectious Diseases, Subgroup on Bacteria, organised an international study on Transfusion-Relevant Bacteria References to be used as a tool for development, validation and comparison of both bacterial screening and pathogen reduction methods.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Four Bacteria References (Staphylococcus epidermidis PEI-B-06, Streptococcus pyogenes PEI-B-20, Klebsiella pneumoniae PEI-B-08 and Escherichia coli PEI-B-19) were selected regarding their ability to proliferate to high counts in PCs and distributed anonymised to 14 laboratories in 10 countries for identification, enumeration and bacterial proliferation in PCs after low spiking (0·3 and 0·03 CFU/ml), to simulate contamination occurring during blood donation.

RESULTS

Bacteria References were correctly identified in 98% of all 52 identifications. S. pyogenes and E. coli grew in PCs in 11 out of 12 laboratories, and K. pneumoniae and S. epidermidis replicated in all participating laboratories. The results of bacterial counts were very consistent between laboratories: the 95% confidence intervals were for S. epidermidis: 1·19-1·32 × 10(7) CFU/ml, S. pyogenes: 0·58-0·69 × 10(7) CFU/ml, K. pneumoniae: 18·71-20·26 × 10(7) CFU/ml and E. coli: 1·78-2·10 × 10(7) CFU/ml.

CONCLUSION

The study was undertaken as a proof of principle with the aim to demonstrate (i) the quality, stability and suitability of the bacterial strains for low-titre spiking of blood components, (ii) the property of donor-independent proliferation in PCs, and (iii) their suitability for worldwide shipping of deep frozen, blinded pathogenic bacteria. These aims were successfully fulfilled. The WHO Expert Committee Biological Standardisation has approved the adoption of these four bacteria strains as the first Repository for Transfusion-Relevant Bacteria Reference Strains and, additionally, endorsed as a project the addition of six further bacteria strain preparations suitable for control of platelet contamination as the next step of enlargement of the repository.

[Problems in microbial safety of advanced therapy medicinal products. Squaring the circle]

Today, sterility of parenteral drugs is practically guaranteed. Well-defined procedures in the pharmaceutical industry enable effective protection against contamination by bacteria and fungi. In contrast, problems regarding microbial safety of advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs), especially of cell therapeutics, are at best only partially solved. The latter should be understood as a challenge for manufacturers, regulators, and physicians. Many of the manufacturing principles mentioned above are not applicable in production of cell therapeutics. Sterility of source materials cannot be guaranteed and the hitherto known procedures for sterilization are, as a rule, not feasible. Thus, the sterility of the final product cannot be guaranteed. Considering the extremely short shelf life of many cell therapeutics, sometimes only a few hours, the results from established methods for sterility testing are often available too late. Furthermore, the sterility of a test sample does not indicate sterility of the whole product. In most cases, conventional methods for pyrogen testing are not applicable for ATMPs. This paper demonstrates relevant limitations regarding microbial safety and pyrogenicity. Possibilities to overcome these problems are discussed and some novel solutions are proposed.

Safety of Phase I clinical trials with monoclonal antibodies in Germany – the regulatory requirements viewed in the aftermath of the TGN1412 disaster

This review summarizes scientific, ethical and regulatory aspects of Phase I clinical trials with monoclonal antibodies. The current standard requirements for pre-clinical testing and for clinical study design are presented. The scientific considerations discussed herein are generally applicable, the view on legal requirements for clinical trials refer to the German jurisdiction only. The adverse effects associated with the TGN1412 Phase I trial indicate that the predictive value of pre-clinical animal models requires reevaluation and that, in certain cases, some issues of clinical trial protocols such as dose fixing may need refinement or redesign. Concrete safety measures, which have been proposed as a consequence of the TGN1412 event include introduction of criteria for high-risk antibodies, sequential inclusion of trial participants and implementation of pre-Phase I studies where dose calculation is based on the pre-clinical No Effect Level instead of the No Observed Adverse Effect Level. The recently established European clinical trials database (EUDRACT Database) is a further safety tool to expedite the sharing of relevant information between scientific authorities.