Tanvex BioPharma, a Taiwan-based biopharmaceutical company, announced this week the submission of its Biologics License Application (BLA) to the FDA for TX-01, a proposed filgrastim biosimilar referencing Neupogen.
Tanvex BioPharma, a Taiwan-based biopharmaceutical company, announced this week the submission of its Biologics License Application (BLA) to the FDA for TX-01, a proposed filgrastim biosimilar referencing Neupogen.
Click here to read more about biosimilar filgrastim.
Tanvex announced that it would be seeking the same indications for TX-01 as the reference product is currently approved for: the treatment of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia. According to data from IQVIA, filgrastim sales for Neupogen, Zarxio, and Granix combined were estimated to be $700 million in the United States last year, and Tanvex hopes to capture a share of that market.
“The submission of the BLA for TX-01 represents an exciting milestone for Tanvex. Such a remarkable action takes Tanvex one step closer to launching its very first biosimilar product in the [United States] market,” said Allen Chao, MD, CEO of Tanvex Biopharma.
Tanvex is also in the midst of developing 3 other biosimilars: TX-05, a proposed trastuzumab biosimilar, referencing Herceptin, is currently beginning phase 3 trials for the treatment of HER2-positive breast cancer; TX-16, a potential bevacizumab biosimilar, referencing Avastin, is nearing the conclusion of phase 1 trials and is being investigated for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer; and TX-17, a proposed adalimumab biosimilar, referencing Humira, is still in the preclinical phase and is being developed to treat patients with rheumatoid arthritis.
To date, there are 2 filgrastim biosimilars available for use in the United States: Zarxio and Nivestym, the latter of which just recently came to market at a 30.3% discount to the reference product. Though there is a third filgrastim on the market, tbo-filgrastim, sold as Granix, it is not technically a biosimilar due to the fact that it earned FDA approval prior to the creation of the biosimilar approval pathway.
Review Calls for Path to Global Harmonization of Biosimilar Development Regulations
March 17th 2025Global biosimilar regulatory harmonization will be needed to reduce development costs and improve patient access, despite challenges posed by differing national requirements and regulatory frameworks, according to review authors.
Will the FTC Be More PBM-Friendly Under a Second Trump Administration?
February 23rd 2025On this episode of Not So Different, we explore the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) second interim report on pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) with Joe Wisniewski from Turquoise Health, discussing key issues like preferential reimbursement, drug pricing transparency, biosimilars, shifting regulations, and how a second Trump administration could reshape PBM practices.
From Amjevita to Zarxio: A Decade of US Biosimilar Approvals
March 6th 2025Since the FDA’s groundbreaking approval of Zarxio in 2015, the US biosimilars market has surged to 67 approvals across 18 originators—though the journey has been anything but smooth, with adoption facing hurdles along the way.
A New Chapter: How 2023 Will Shape the US Biosimilar Space for 2024 and Beyond
December 31st 2023On this episode of Not So Different, Cencora's Brian Biehn and Corey Ford take a look back at major policy and regulatory advancements in 2023 and how these changes will alter the space going forward.
Biosimilar Approvals Streamlined With Advanced Statistics Amidst Differing Regulatory Requirements
February 25th 2025The FDA and European Medicines Agency (EMA) mandate high similarity between biosimilars and reference products, but their regulatory processes differ, especially with multiple reference products.