Scott Lassman, JD, partner in Goodwin's Technology and Life Sciences Group, explains why REMS programs give biosimilar and generic drug developers cause for concern.
Transcript:
What are REMS programs, and why are some stakeholders concerned about them?
A: REMS programs are safety programs that, again, were enacted back in 2007 and they are designed to allow the FDA to approve a drug even if it might have some safety issues that typical risk mitigation programs can’t address.
For drug products, the main way that FDA reduces risks is by identifying them on the label so that physicians know what the risks are and can take appropriate steps with their patients. In some cases, maybe not give a particular medication to a patient if the risks are too great. I think the conclusion FDA came to is that they can’t really trust physicians. Physicians don’t read the label and will use medicines even when the label says they shouldn’t be used. [The FDA] asked congress for the authority to take stronger measures, and 1 of the measures they got was a REMS.
The REMS provisions allow FDA to impose things like distribution and use restrictions. For instance, it might require special training for a physician to be able to prescribe the medicine, or it might say you may only use it in a certain facility as safeguards. They did really restrict how a medicine can be used and distributed. The concern folks have, particularly biosimilar manufacturers, is that brand companies that have drugs that are subject to a REMS are using them to prevent generic competition. They do that in 2 ways: the first is to restrict samples of the brand. So if you’ve got a generic product or a biosimilar, you need to get samples of the brand so you can conduct your tests. For a generic, it’s bioequivalence tests, [and] for a biosimilar it’s to show biosimilarity. But the brands are essentially saying, “our product is subject to a REMS. We can’t give it to you because it just doesn’t comply with the REMS requirements.” That prevents companies from doing the testing that they need to submit the application.
The second concern is that, and this is just for generics, not for biosimilars, but for generic products there’s a requirement that the generic, if it gets approved, must have a single shared REMS. It must essentially share the REMS that the brand already has. A lot of times, companies will delay agreeing, and the generic cannot get approved unless it has a single shared REMS. The concern is that you’re supposed to negotiate with a party that really has no interest in agreeing with you, and [those are] the main 2 concerns with the REMS.
Skyrizi Overtakes Humira: “Product Hopping” Leaves Biosimilar Market in Limbo
November 7th 2024For the first time, Skyrizi (risankizumab-rzaa) has replaced Humira (reference adalimumab) as AbbVie’s sales driver, largely due to companies encouraging “product hopping” to avoid competition, creating concerns for the sustainability of the burgeoning adalimumab biosimilar market.
Biosimilars in America: Overcoming Barriers and Maximizing Impact
July 21st 2024Join us as we explore the complexities of the US biosimilars market, discussing legislative influences, payer and provider adoption factors, and strategies to overcome industry challenges with expert insights from Kyle Noonan, PharmD, MS, value & access strategy manager at Cencora.
BioRationality: Should mRNA Copies Be Filed as NDAs or Biosimilars?
November 4th 2024The article by Sarfaraz K. Niazi, PhD, argues that the FDA’s classification of future copies of messenger RNA (mRNA) products could be reconsidered, suggesting they might be eligible for new drug applications (NDAs) or a hybrid biosimilar category due to their unique characteristics and increasing prevalence.
Breaking Barriers in Osteoporosis Care: New Denosumab Biosimilars Wyost, Jubbonti Approved
June 16th 2024In this episode, The Center for Biosimilars® delves into the FDA approval of the first denosumab biosimilars, Wyost and Jubbonti (denosumab-bbdz), and discuss their potential to revolutionize osteoporosis treatment with expert insights from 2 rheumatologists.
Panelists Stress Stakeholder Education to Build Confidence in Biosimilars
October 31st 2024By expanding educational initiatives to clarify biosimilar safety, efficacy, and interchangeability, stakeholders can foster trust, improve access, and ensure that biosimilars are widely accepted as high-quality, cost-effective alternatives to originator biologics.
Enhancing Adoption of Infused Biosimilars for a Sustainable Future
October 30th 2024An IQVIA report highlights challenges to the sustainability of infused biosimilars in the US, citing rebate walls and reimbursement policies, and proposes key solutions to enhance adoption and benefits for all stakeholders.