Brazil benefits from a program, known as the Partnership for Productive Development, that brings together government and the private sector to develop strategic products of interest to the Brazilian health system—including biosimilars of high-cost biologics that account for approximately half of annual drug spending.
In 2010, Brazil’s National Health Surveillance Agency (ANVISA) established criteria for biosimilar approval, forming a comprehensive pathway for these products for the first time. The guidelines, Collegiate Board Resolution 55/2010, provides 2 ways in which a biosimilar can be approved: comparability and individual development.
The comparability demonstration is similar to that described by the World Health Organization. Under Brazil’s comparability pathway, biosimilars require comparative data from preclinical as well as phase 1 and phase 3 clinical studies in relation to the reference product, and the extrapolation of indications is permitted. Robust pharmacovigilance systems, similar to those in place for the reference drug, are required.
Read more about biosimilars in Brazil.
However, the individual development pathway differs significantly from the comparability pathway; individual development requires comparative data only from preclinical trials and phase 3 confirmatory studies, with no requirement to produce comparative data from phase 1 studies. Extrapolation of indications for products developed in this manner are not permitted, and these products may not be treated as interchangeable with their references.
For both types of biosimilar products, explains a newly published paper, Brazil benefits from a program known as the Partnership for Productive Development (PPD), which brings together government and the private sector to develop strategic products of interest to the Brazilian health system—including biosimilars of the high-cost biologics that account for approximately half of annual drug spending.
In an arrangement that the paper calls a “win-win opportunity” for both government and private companies, under a PPD agreement, the master cell bank for a biologic is required by law to be transferred to the government organization participating in the agreement for use in manufacturing, and the biosimilar maker develops a product that will then be purchased directly by the Brazilian Ministry of Health. Thus, the government establishes a supply of a cost-reducing product, and the biosimilar developer ensures robust sales of its product. Biosimilars that are currently part of such agreements include rituximab, adalimumab, and bevacizumab.
The impact of such agreements on Brazil’s healthcare system has the potential to be significant. At the same time, nationalizing production of biosimilars presents an opportunity, say the paper's authors, for the nation to positive impact its trade balance, generate tax revenue, and provide jobs in Brazil.
Reference
Scheinberg MA, Felix PAO, Kos IA, Andrade MA, Azevedo VF. Partnership for productive development of biosimilar products: perspective of access to biological products in the Brazilian market. Einstein (Sao Paulo). 2018;16(3): eRW4175. doi: 10.1590/S1679-45082018RW4175.
13 Strategies to Avoid the Nocebo Effect During Biosimilar Switching
December 18th 2024A systematic review identified 13 strategies, including patient and provider education, empathetic communication, and shared decision-making, to mitigate the nocebo effect in biosimilar switching, emphasizing the need for a multifaceted approach to improve patient perceptions and therapeutic outcomes.
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.
BioRationality: Withdrawal of Proposed Terminal Disclaimer Rule Spells Major Setback for Biosimilars
December 10th 2024The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)’s withdrawal of its proposed terminal disclaimer rule is seen as a setback for biosimilar developers, as it preserves patent prosecution practices that favor originator companies and increases costs for biosimilar competition, according to Sarfaraz K. Niazi, PhD.
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.
Pertuzumab Biosimilar Shows Promise in HER2-Positive Breast Cancer Treatment
December 9th 2024The proposed pertuzumab biosimilar QL1209 demonstrated equivalent efficacy and safety to reference pertuzumab (Perjeta) in neoadjuvant treatment of HER2-positive, ER/PR-negative early or locally advanced breast cancer, offering a cost-effective alternative with comparable clinical outcomes.
Commercial Payer Coverage of Biosimilars: Market Share, Pricing, and Policy Shifts
December 4th 2024Researchers observe significant shifts in payer preferences for originator vs biosimilar products from 2017 to 2022, revealing growing payer interest in multiple product options, alongside the increasing market share of biosimilars, which contributed to notable reductions in both average sales prices and wholesale acquisition costs.