The 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.
Biosimilars are only intended for therapeutic proteins, and to establish this, the FDA moved them from Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research to Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, yet they are still approved under the biologics license application (BLA) pathway. There was no rationale except the FDA was unsure how biosimilars would emerge. The determining factor was whether a product could be fully characterized by the amino acid sequence and its secondary and tertiary structures. So far, so good. Now comes a challenge for the FDA.
The FDA classifies messenger RNA (mRNA) therapies under "gene therapy," particularly when the mRNA modifies protein expression to treat or prevent disease. This classification aligns with the FDA’s regulatory framework for gene therapies, which includes products that use nucleic acids to alter cellular functions. The FDA's "Guidance for Industry: Long Term Follow-Up After Administration of Human Gene Therapy Products" (2020) states that gene therapy includes any therapy that uses nucleic acids, such as mRNA, to elicit a therapeutic effect.
The mRNA products are made up of a nucleoside chain that does not undergo any structural transformation to a higher order, and they can be compared with a copy of a chemical molecule no less than a chemical molecule. Again, like biosimilars, there was no vision that this question would arise one day, the FDA decided not to address this question. First, RNA is not a gene; it does not enter the nucleus or have no effect on the genes or the DNA. It is a chemical. So, I asked the FDA why it should not be eligible for abbreviated new drug application (NDA) 505(b)(2) filing or 351(k) filing.
The answer was no. It will be a new BLA if you copy an approved mRNA product, for example, if I copy the Pfizer of Moderna COVID-19 vaccine. No one could tell the difference between my product and the product coming out of Pfizer or Moderna, but it will be subject to extensive testing of gene therapy products. This new and exciting challenge has profound impacts as thousands of mRNA products are expected to land soon, including therapeutic proteins, protein vaccines, and many more. They will be available once their exclusivity and patents expire, but we do not know which legislation will allow them to be.
And then there is another category to be considered: a product approved under 351(a), and upon the expiry of exclusivity if I deliver the same protein using its mRNA, would this be considered a “biosimilar”? We have the same route of administration, but everything else is different and does not comply with biosimilars' qualifications.Can we expect a “hybrid biosimilar” category for such products? It is still a gene therapy product, states the FDA. I disagree.
Regardless of the regulatory pathway for these products, I anticipate a deluge of such possibilities that the FDA will face, and to help the FDA, I have filed a petition with an outline of a new guideline for copies of nucleoside products and another guideline for alternate expression of proteins, such as from recombinant to ribosomes. It will be an exciting future from a scientific and logical perspective. I do not think the FDA is ready.
Senators Introduce Bipartisan Legislation to Protect Skinny Labeling
January 2nd 2025To close out the year, 4 senators came together to introduce a new bipartisan bill to protect biosimilar and generic drug manufacturers from patent litigation when obtaining “skinny label” approvals for their products.
Biosimilars Development Roundup for October 2024—Podcast Edition
November 3rd 2024On this episode of Not So Different, we discuss the GRx+Biosims conference, which included discussions on data transparency, artificial intelligence (AI), and collaboration to enhance the global supply chain for biosimilars and generic drugs, as well as the evolving requirements for biosimilar devices.
The Top 5 Most-Read Policy Articles of 2024
December 28th 2024The top biosimilar policy articles of 2024 highlight advancements that include FDA guidance to simplify biosimilar interchangeability and CMS drug price negotiations under the Inflation Reduction Act, alongside challenges posed by pharmacy benefit manager rebate practices and the need for more active stakeholder engagement.
Biosimilars Policy Roundup for September 2024—Podcast Edition
October 6th 2024On this episode of Not So Different, we discuss the FDA's approval of a new biosimilar for treating retinal conditions, which took place in September 2024 alongside other major industry developments, including ongoing legal disputes and broader trends in market dynamics and regulatory challenges.
Top 5 Most-Read Regulatory Articles of 2024
December 25th 2024In 2024, significant biosimilar approvals were granted by the American and European regulatory agencies, including the first interchangeability designations for biosimilars referencing ustekinumab, adalimumab, denosumab, and aflibercept, marking key regulatory milestones in improving patient access to cost-effective treatments.
Empowering Vulnerable Populations: The Path to Equitable Biologic Therapy Access
December 22nd 2024Elie Bahou, PharmD, senior vice president and system chief pharmacy officer at Providence, discusses strategies to improve equitable access to biologic therapies, including tiered formularies, income-based cost sharing, patient assistance programs, and fostering payer partnerships.