Skip to content
2000
Volume 10, Issue 1
  • ISSN: 2667-3371
  • E-ISSN: 2667-338X

Abstract

This comprehensive review delves into the intricate landscape of biosimilars, offering a nuanced exploration of their background, pivotal role in emerging markets like BRICS, and the multifaceted considerations spanning regulatory, quality, manufacturing, pricing, reimbursement, intellectual property, pharmacovigilance, and future trends. The backdrop on biosimilars unravels their significance as a transformative force in healthcare, providing cost-effective alternatives to biologics. The focus then shifts to the emerging markets encapsulated by BRICS, where economic and healthcare landscapes are pivotal determinants in shaping the biosimilar ecosystem. Navigating the regulatory landscape becomes imperative for biosimilar developers, and an overview of regulatory agencies within BRICS underscores the need for harmonized guidelines. Delving deeper, the paper outlines the intricate registration requirements, providing insights into key considerations pivotal for successful biosimilar submissions. Quality, manufacturing, and marketing of biosimilars form a critical triad. Quality attributes and similarity assessments, coupled with analytical methods and characterization, emerge as focal points ensuring the safety and efficacy of these biologic counterparts. Pricing, reimbursement, and market access, the linchpin for successful biosimilar integration, are dissected comprehensively. Pricing policies and strategies, reimbursement considerations, and the plethora of challenges and opportunities associated with market access are examined, offering a holistic understanding of the economic dynamics at play. The intellectual property landscape, delineated through patent regulations, data exclusivity, challenges, and litigation, adds a layer of complexity to biosimilar development and market entry. Pharmacovigilance and post-marketing surveillance emerge as crucial pillars ensuring the ongoing safety of biosimilars. Safety monitoring, risk management plans, and post-marketing surveillance requirements are essential components in this ever-evolving field. The exploration culminates in case studies and market insights, providing tangible examples of successful biosimilar submissions and approvals within the BRICS nations. This segment unveils the current market dynamics, competitive landscapes, and the intricacies of navigating these diverse markets. Looking forward, the paper outlines potential growth prospects and anticipates future trends and opportunities in the biosimilar landscape. It concludes by addressing the evolving policy and regulatory developments, offering stakeholders a comprehensive guide for navigating the dynamic and promising future of biosimilars within the BRICS nations. This work serves as a vital resource for industry professionals, policymakers, and researchers involved in the intricate journey of biosimilar development and market access.

© 2024 Bentham Science Publishers
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/adctra/10.2174/0126673371316219240929170401
2024-11-06
2025-09-29

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/adctra/10.2174/0126673371316219240929170401
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. TichyE.M. HoffmanJ.M. SudaK.J. RimM.H. TadrousM. CuellarS. ClarkJ.S. WardJ. SchumockG.T. National trends in prescription drug expenditures and projections for 2022.Am. J. Health Syst. Pharm.202279141158117210.1093/ajhp/zxac10235385103
     [Google Scholar]
  2. NandagopalA ShakeelY TirunagariM. Biosimilars: Current scenario and challenges in India.ACTA Pharm. Sci.201856110.23893/1307‑2080.APS.05601
     [Google Scholar]
  3. ZelenetzA.D. AhmedI. BraudE.L. CrossJ.D. Davenport-EnnisN. DickinsonB.D. GoldbergS.E. GottliebS. JohnsonP.E. LymanG.H. MarkusR. MatulonisU.A. ReinkeD. LiE.C. DeMartinoJ. LarsenJ.K. HoffmanJ.M. NCCN biosimilars white paper: Regulatory, scientific, and patient safety perspectives.J. Natl. Compr. Canc. Netw.20119Suppl. 4S-1S-2210.6004/jnccn.2011.013621976013
     [Google Scholar]
  4. TsiftsoglouA.S. RuizS. SchneiderC.K. Development and regulation of biosimilars: Current status and future challenges.BioDrugs201327320321110.1007/s40259‑013‑0020‑y23553340
     [Google Scholar]
  5. BuiL.A. HurstS. FinchG.L. IngramB. JacobsI.A. KirchhoffC.F. NgC.K. RyanA.M. Key considerations in the preclinical development of biosimilars.Drug Discov. Today201520Suppl. 131510.1016/j.drudis.2015.03.01125912284
     [Google Scholar]
  6. BlackstoneE.A. JosephP.F. The economics of biosimilars.Am. Health Drug Benefits20136846947824991376
     [Google Scholar]
  7. RotensteinL.S. RanN. ShiversJ.P. YarchoanM. CloseK.L. Opportunities and challenges for biosimilars: What’s on the horizon in the global insulin market?Clin. Diabetes201230413815010.2337/diaclin.30.4.138
     [Google Scholar]
  8. MulcahyA.W. HlávkaJ.P. CaseS.R. Biosimilar cost savings in the United States: Initial experience and future potential.Rand Health Q.201874330083415
     [Google Scholar]
  9. BoothF.W. RobertsC.K. LayeM.J. Lack of exercise is a major cause of chronic diseases.Compr. Physiol.2012221143121110.1002/cphy.c11002523798298
     [Google Scholar]
  10. JakovljevicM. LiuY. CerdaA. SimonyanM. CorreiaT. MariitaR.M. KumaraA.S. GarciaL. KrsticK. OsabohienR. ToanT.K. AdhikariC. ChucN.T.K. KhatriR.B. ChattuV.K. WangL. WijeratneT. KouassiE. KhanH.N. VarjacicM. The Global South political economy of health financing and spending landscape – History and presence.J. Med. Econ.202124sup1253310.1080/13696998.2021.200769134866543
     [Google Scholar]
  11. BalzerH. AskonasJ. The Triple Helix after communism: Russia and China compared.Triple Helix20163113110.1186/s40604‑015‑0031‑4
     [Google Scholar]
  12. GereffiG Fernandez-StarkK Global value chain analysis: A primer.2nd edDuke Center on Globalization, Governance & Competitiveness (Duke CGGC)2016
     [Google Scholar]
  13. von ZedtwitzM. GassmannO. Market versus technology drive in R&D internationalization: Four different patterns of managing research and development.Res. Policy200231456958810.1016/S0048‑7333(01)00125‑1
     [Google Scholar]
  14. ZakariaN. AmelinckxA. WilemonD. Working together apart? Building a knowledge‐sharing culture for global virtual teams.Creat. Innov. Manag.2004131152910.1111/j.1467‑8691.2004.00290.x
     [Google Scholar]
  15. HunterB.M. Investor States: Global Health at The End of Aid.Elements in Global Development StudiesCambridge, United KingdomCambridge University Press202310.1017/9781009209564
     [Google Scholar]
  16. KlarinA. RayP.K. Political connections and strategic choices of emerging market firms.Int. J. Emerg. Mark.201914341043510.1108/IJOEM‑05‑2016‑0138
     [Google Scholar]
  17. MpanzaN.M. GodmanB. KeeleM.G. MatlalaM. Trends in the utilization of medicines sold in the private sector post- registration in South Africa and the implications for similar countries.BMC Public Health202323119210.1186/s12889‑023‑15021‑236709246
     [Google Scholar]
  18. ShadmiE. ChenY. DouradoI. Faran-PerachI. FurlerJ. HangomaP. HanvoravongchaiP. ObandoC. PetrosyanV. RaoK.D. RuanoA.L. ShiL. de SouzaL.E. Spitzer-ShohatS. SturgissE. SuphanchaimatR. UribeM.V. WillemsS. Health equity and COVID-19: Global perspectives.Int. J. Equity Health202019110410.1186/s12939‑020‑01218‑z32586388
     [Google Scholar]
  19. DahlgrenG WhiteheadM European strategies for tackling social inequities in health: Levelling up Part 2.WHO Regional office for Europe Copenhagen2006
     [Google Scholar]
  20. O’NeilS NaeveK VedR An examination of the maternal health quality of care landscape in India.Math. Policy Res.20172
     [Google Scholar]
  21. MayosiB.M. FlisherA.J. LallooU.G. SitasF. TollmanS.M. BradshawD. The burden of non-communicable diseases in South Africa.Lancet2009374969393494710.1016/S0140‑6736(09)61087‑419709736
     [Google Scholar]
  22. AhmadA-S. OlechE. McClellanJ.E. KirchhoffC.F. Development of biosimilars. Seminars in arthritis and rheumatism.Elsevier2016
     [Google Scholar]
  23. NiaziS.K. Molecular Biosimilarity—An AI-Driven Paradigm Shift.Int. J. Mol. Sci.202223181069010.3390/ijms23181069036142600
     [Google Scholar]
  24. CazapE. JacobsI. McBrideA. PopovianR. SikoraK. Global acceptance of biosimilars: Importance of regulatory consistency, education, and trust.Oncologist201823101188119810.1634/theoncologist.2017‑067129769386
     [Google Scholar]
  25. de AssisM.R. PintoV. Strengths and weaknesses of the Brazilian regulation on biosimilars: A critical view of the regulatory requirements for biosimilars in Brazil.Ther. Adv. Musculoskelet. Dis.2018101225325910.1177/1759720X1880968330515251
     [Google Scholar]
  26. TsurutaL.R. Lopes dos SantosM. MoroA.M. Biosimilars advancements: Moving on to the future.Biotechnol. Prog.20153151139114910.1002/btpr.206625708573
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Castañeda-HernándezG. SzekaneczZ. MyslerE. AzevedoV.F. GuzmanR. GutierrezM. RodríguezW. KarateevD. Biopharmaceuticals for rheumatic diseases in Latin America, Europe, Russia, and India: Innovators, biosimilars, and intended copies.Joint Bone Spine201481647147710.1016/j.jbspin.2014.03.01924956990
     [Google Scholar]
  28. KumarR. SigalaS. MalgariniR.B. PimpinellaG. PaniL. PecorelliS. Biosimilars: Regulatory status and implications across the world.J. Pharmacovigil.20164s3410.4172/2329‑6887.S3‑002
     [Google Scholar]
  29. RahalkarH. CetintasH.C. SalekS. Quality, non-clinical and clinical considerations for biosimilar monoclonal antibody development: EU, WHO, USA, Canada, and BRICS-TM regulatory guidelines.Front. Pharmacol.20189107910.3389/fphar.2018.0107930364154
     [Google Scholar]
  30. KrishnanA. ModyR. MalhotraH. Global regulatory landscape of biosimilars: Emerging and established market perspectives.Biosimilars2015•••1932
     [Google Scholar]
  31. YüceM. SertF. TorabfamM. ParlarA. GürelB. ÇakırN. DağlıkocaD.E. KhanM.A. ÇapanY. Fractionated charge variants of biosimilars: A review of separation methods, structural and functional analysis.Anal. Chim. Acta2021115223818910.1016/j.aca.2020.12.06433648647
     [Google Scholar]
  32. WadhwaM. KnezevicI. KangH.N. ThorpeR. Immunogenicity assessment of biotherapeutic products: An overview of assays and their utility.Biologicals201543529830610.1016/j.biologicals.2015.06.00426144595
     [Google Scholar]
  33. NicoteraG. SferrazzaG. SerafinoA. PierimarchiP. The iterative development of medicines through the European medicine agency’s adaptive pathway approach.Front. Med.2019614810.3389/fmed.2019.0014831316991
     [Google Scholar]
  34. AzevedoV. HassettB. FonsecaJ.E. AtsumiT. CoindreauJ. JacobsI. MahgoubE. O’BrienJ. SinghE. VicikS. FitzpatrickB. Differentiating biosimilarity and comparability in biotherapeutics.Clin. Rheumatol.201635122877288610.1007/s10067‑016‑3427‑227734233
     [Google Scholar]
  35. DörnerT. StrandV. Castañeda-HernándezG. FerraccioliG. IsaacsJ.D. KvienT.K. Martin-MolaE. MittendorfT. SmolenJ.S. BurmesterG.R. The role of biosimilars in the treatment of rheumatic diseases.Ann. Rheum. Dis.201372332232810.1136/annrheumdis‑2012‑20271523253920
     [Google Scholar]
  36. BeckA. Wagner-RoussetE. AyoubD. Van DorsselaerA. Sanglier-CianféraniS. Characterization of therapeutic antibodies and related products.Anal. Chem.201385271573610.1021/ac303235523134362
     [Google Scholar]
  37. SchellekensH. KlingerE. MühlebachS. BrinJ.F. StormG. CrommelinD.J.A. The therapeutic equivalence of complex drugs.Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol.201159117618310.1016/j.yrtph.2010.09.02120951177
     [Google Scholar]
  38. SandraK. VandenheedeI. SandraP. Modern chromatographic and mass spectrometric techniques for protein biopharmaceutical characterization.J. Chromatogr. A201413358110310.1016/j.chroma.2013.11.05724365115
     [Google Scholar]
  39. LángJ.A. BaloghZ.C. NyitraiM.F. JuhászC. GiliczeA.K.B. IliásA. ZólyomiZ. BodorC. RábaiE. In vitro functional characterization of biosimilar therapeutic antibodies.Drug Discov. Today. Technol.202037415010.1016/j.ddtec.2020.11.01034895654
     [Google Scholar]
  40. KabirE.R. MoreinoS.S. Sharif SiamM.K. The breakthrough of biosimilars: A twist in the narrative of biological therapy.Biomolecules20199941010.3390/biom909041031450637
     [Google Scholar]
  41. PinedaC. Castañeda HernándezG. JacobsI.A. AlvarezD.F. CariniC. Assessing the immunogenicity of biopharmaceuticals.BioDrugs201630319520610.1007/s40259‑016‑0174‑527097915
     [Google Scholar]
  42. AmbrogellyA. GozoS. KatiyarA. DellatoreS. KuneY. BhatR. Analytical comparability study of recombinant monoclonal antibody therapeutics. MAbs.Taylor & Francis2018
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Wolff-HolzE. TiitsoK. VleminckxC. WeiseM. Evolution of the EU biosimilar framework: Past and future.BioDrugs201933662163410.1007/s40259‑019‑00377‑y31541400
     [Google Scholar]
  44. DeclerckP. Farouk RezkM. The road from development to approval: Evaluating the body of evidence to confirm biosimilarity.Rheumatology201756Suppl. 4iv4iv1310.1093/rheumatology/kex27928903545
     [Google Scholar]
  45. RahalkarH. SheppardA. SalekS. Biosimilar development and review process in the BRICS-TM countries: Proposal for a standardized model to improve regulatory performance.Expert Rev. Clin. Pharmacol.202215221523610.1080/17512433.2022.203449835078378
     [Google Scholar]
  46. KirchhoffC.F. WangX.Z.M. ConlonH.D. AndersonS. RyanA.M. BoseA. Biosimilars: Key regulatory considerations and similarity assessment tools.Biotechnol. Bioeng.2017114122696270510.1002/bit.2643828842986
     [Google Scholar]
  47. VisserJ. FeuersteinI. StanglerT. SchmiedererT. FritschC. SchiestlM. Physicochemical and functional comparability between the proposed biosimilar rituximab GP2013 and originator rituximab.BioDrugs201327549550710.1007/s40259‑013‑0036‑323649935
     [Google Scholar]
  48. LeeJ. KangH.A. BaeJ.S. KimK.D. LeeK.H. LimK.J. Evaluation of analytical similarity between trastuzumab biosimilar CT-P6 and reference product using statistical analyses.Taylor & Francis.2018
     [Google Scholar]
  49. BöhmeI. Beck-SickingerA.G. Illuminating the life of GPCRs.Cell Commun. Signal.2009711610.1186/1478‑811X‑7‑1619602276
     [Google Scholar]
  50. ZhouQ. QiuH. The mechanistic impact of N-glycosylation on stability, pharmacokinetics, and immunogenicity of therapeutic proteins.J. Pharm. Sci.201910841366137710.1016/j.xphs.2018.11.02930471292
     [Google Scholar]
  51. BhattacharyaS. RathoreA.S. A novel filter-assisted protein precipitation (FAPP) based sample pre-treatment method for LC-MS peptide mapping for biosimilar characterization.J. Pharm. Biomed. Anal.202323411552710.1016/j.jpba.2023.11552737364451
     [Google Scholar]
  52. CaoD. DengC. WangG. MeiX. XieJ. LiuY. LiuY. YangY. LiS. LiuC. Physicochemical and functional similarity assessment between proposed bevacizumab biosimilar BAT1706 and reference bevacizumab.Drugs R D.202323326728810.1007/s40268‑023‑00432‑837479945
     [Google Scholar]
  53. RamachandraB. Development of impurity profiling methods using modern analytical techniques.Crit. Rev. Anal. Chem.2017471243610.1080/10408347.2016.116991327070830
     [Google Scholar]
  54. FilhoC.S. IdoV.H.P. Courts and pharmaceutical patents: From formalist positivism to the emergence of a global law.Access to Medicines and Vaccines: Implementing Flexibilities Under Intellectual Property Law.Springer International Publishing2022
     [Google Scholar]
  55. ChhabraH. MouslimM.C. KashiramkaS. RathoreA.S. Dynamics of biosimilar uptake in emerging markets.Expert Opin. Biol. Ther.202222667968810.1080/14712598.2022.207655735535988
     [Google Scholar]
  56. BlandizziC. MeroniP.L. LapadulaG. Comparing originator biologics and biosimilars: A review of the relevant issues.Clin. Ther.20173951026103910.1016/j.clinthera.2017.03.01428416374
     [Google Scholar]
  57. LuoX. LiuQ. ZhouZ. YiL. PengL. WanX. ZengX. TanC. LiS. Cost-effectiveness of bevacizumab biosimilar LY01008 combined with chemotherapy as first-line treatment for Chinese patients with advanced or recurrent nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer.Front. Pharmacol.20221383221510.3389/fphar.2022.83221535517823
     [Google Scholar]
  58. RahalkarH. Evaluation of the Regulatory Requirements for Development and Approval of Biosimilar Medicines in the BRICS-TM Countries: Improving Patients’.Access.2021
     [Google Scholar]
  59. SimoensS. AbdallahK. BarbierL. LacostaT.B. BlondaA. CarE. ClaessensZ. DesmetT. De SutterE. GovaertsL. JanssensR. LalovaT. MoorkensE. SaesenR. SchoefsE. VandenplasY. Van OverbeekeE. VerbaanderdC. HuysI. How to balance valuable innovation with affordable access to medicines in Belgium?Front. Pharmacol.20221396070110.3389/fphar.2022.96070136188534
     [Google Scholar]
  60. LuoY. A coopetition perspective of global competition.J. World Bus.200742212914410.1016/j.jwb.2006.08.007
     [Google Scholar]
  61. PearceF. LinL. TeoE. NgK. KhooD. Health technology assessment and its use in drug policies: Singapore.Value Health Reg. Issues20191817618310.1016/j.vhri.2018.03.00729954696
     [Google Scholar]
  62. VentolaC.L. Evaluation of biosimilars for formulary inclusion: Factors for consideration by P&T committees.P&T2015401068068926535024
     [Google Scholar]
  63. VoglerS. ParisV. FerrarioA. WirtzV.J. de JoncheereK. SchneiderP. PedersenH.B. DedetG. BabarZ.U.D. How can pricing and reimbursement policies improve affordable access to medicines? Lessons learned from European countries.Appl. Health Econ. Health Policy201715330732110.1007/s40258‑016‑0300‑z28063134
     [Google Scholar]
  64. StevensonJ.G. PopovianR. JacobsI. HurstS. ShaneL.G. Biosimilars: Practical considerations for pharmacists.Ann. Pharmacother.201751759060210.1177/106002801769074328176529
     [Google Scholar]
  65. WillkeR.J. NeumannP.J. GarrisonL.P.Jr RamseyS.D. Review of recent US value frameworks—a health economics approach: An ISPOR Special Task Force report.Value Health201821215516010.1016/j.jval.2017.12.01129477393
     [Google Scholar]
  66. RahalkarH. SheppardA. Lopez-MoralesC.A. LoboL. SalekS. Challenges faced by the biopharmaceutical industry in the development and marketing authorization of biosimilar medicines in BRICS-TM countries: An exploratory study.Pharmaceut. Med.202135423525110.1007/s40290‑021‑00395‑834292558
     [Google Scholar]
  67. LiX. Recent applications of quantitative mass spectrometry in biopharmaceutical process development and manufacturing.J. Pharm. Biomed. Anal.202323411558110.1016/j.jpba.2023.11558137494866
     [Google Scholar]
  68. Kanikaram SatyanarayanaK.S. Sadhana SrivastavaS.S. Promoting access to healthcare through biosimilars: Addressing intellectual property rights and regulatory barriers.Intellectual property issues in biotechnologyCABI WallingfordUK2016193228
     [Google Scholar]
  69. SarwalR PrasadU GopalKM KalalS KaurD KumarA Investment opportunities in India's healthcare sector.NITI Aayog202110.31219/osf.io/rtup2
     [Google Scholar]
  70. Mazumdar-ShawK. Leveraging affordable innovation to tackle India’s healthcare challenge.IIMB Manag. Rev.2018301375010.1016/j.iimb.2017.11.003
     [Google Scholar]
  71. RathoreA.S. StevensonJ.G. ChhabraH. MaharanaC. The global landscape on interchangeability of biosimilars.Expert Opin. Biol. Ther.202222213314810.1080/14712598.2021.188951133567923
     [Google Scholar]
  72. BuickA. Approaches to the Implementation of the Protection of Submitted Test Data. Intellectual Property Rights in Pharmaceutical Test Data: Origins, Globalisation and Impact.Springer2023139173
     [Google Scholar]
  73. MuellerJ.M. The tiger awakens: The tumultuous transformation of India's patent system and the rise of Indian pharmaceutical innovation.U. Pitt. l. reV200668491
     [Google Scholar]
  74. MercurioB. UpretiP.N. Patent term extension and test data protection obligations: Identifying the gap in policy, research, and practice of implementing free trade agreements.J. Law Biosci.2023102lsad01710.1093/jlb/lsad01737476179
     [Google Scholar]
  75. MikeJ.H. A re‐evaluation of the framework for the protection of patents, women’s health in Nigeria and the issue of accessing pharmaceutical innovation in Africa: Designing strategies for medicines.J. World Intellect. Prop.2019223-416220410.1111/jwip.12123
     [Google Scholar]
  76. NeumannP.J. CohenJ.T. OllendorfD.A. The right price: A value-based prescription for drug costs.Oxford University Press202110.1093/oso/9780197512883.001.0001
     [Google Scholar]
  77. JagunC. Strategies for Compliance with Government Regulation in a Pharmaceutical Company.Walden University2018
     [Google Scholar]
  78. GarciaC.A. StroudJ. Ships in the night: Resolving administrative conflict between fda-and patent-related legislation.Am UL Rev.2018681111
     [Google Scholar]
  79. MercurioB. KimD. Contemporary issues in pharmaceutical patent law: Setting the framework and exploring policy options.Taylor & Francis201710.4324/9781315677972
     [Google Scholar]
  80. KrishnaPS NagabhushanamM RamakrishnaG Current scenario of pharmacovigilance in india and its comparision with usa and EU.World J. Pharmaceut. Res.2021101182637
     [Google Scholar]
  81. MurffH.J. PatelV.L. HripcsakG. BatesD.W. Detecting adverse events for patient safety research: A review of current methodologies.J. Biomed. Inform.2003361-213114310.1016/j.jbi.2003.08.00314552854
     [Google Scholar]
  82. BiswasP. Pharmacovigilance in Asia.J. Pharmacol. Pharmacother.201341_supplSuppl. 1S7S1910.4103/0976‑500X.12094124347987
     [Google Scholar]
  83. FelixT. JordanJ.B. AkersC. PatelB. DragoD. Current state of biologic pharmacovigilance in the European Union: Improvements are needed.Expert Opin. Drug Saf.201918323124010.1080/14740338.2019.157781830714424
     [Google Scholar]
  84. WangW. MunsakaM. BuchananJ. LiJ. Quantitative Drug Safety and Benefit Risk Evaluation: Practical and Cross-Disciplinary Approaches.CRC Press202110.1201/9780429488801
     [Google Scholar]
  85. WeekesL. Optimizing use of biologic medicines using a quality use of medicines approach.Biologics, Biosimilars, and Biobetters: An Introduction for Pharmacists.Physicians, and Other Health Practitioners2020237251
     [Google Scholar]
  86. MyslerE. PinedaC. HoriuchiT. SinghE. MahgoubE. CoindreauJ. JacobsI. Clinical and regulatory perspectives on biosimilar therapies and intended copies of biologics in rheumatology.Rheumatol. Int.201636561362510.1007/s00296‑016‑3444‑026920148
     [Google Scholar]
  87. RathoreA.S. BhargavaA. Regulatory considerations in biosimilars: Middle East and Africa regions.Prep. Biochem. Biotechnol.202151873173710.1080/10826068.2021.195934634365902
     [Google Scholar]
  88. BodeG Starck-LantovaP. Future of regulatory safety assessments.Drug Discovery and Evaluation: Methods in Clinical PharmacologySpringer20201148116810.1007/978‑3‑319‑68864‑0_71
     [Google Scholar]
  89. IqbalZ. SadafS. Biosimilars: A comparative study of regulatory, safety and pharmacovigilance monograph in the developed and developing economies.J. Pharm. Pharm. Sci.20222514918210.18433/jpps3243335439428
     [Google Scholar]
  90. SimonJ.W. Risk Management for Medical Device Manufacturers.Quality Press2022
     [Google Scholar]
  91. MakanjeeC.R. Diagnostic Medical Imaging Services with Myriads of Ethical Dilemmas in a Contemporary Healthcare Context: Is Artificial Intelligence the Solution? Medical Imaging Methods.CRC Press202114410.1201/9781003112068‑1
     [Google Scholar]
  92. RajN. FernandesS. CharyuluN.R. DubeyA. G SR. HebbarS. Postmarket surveillance: A review on key aspects and measures on the effective functioning in the context of the United Kingdom and Canada.Ther. Adv. Drug Saf.201910204209861986541310.1177/204209861986541331384423
     [Google Scholar]
  93. WadhwaM. KangH.N. ThorpeR. KnezevicI. ApreaP. BielskyM.C. EkmanN. HeimH.K. JoungJ. KurkiP. LacanaE. NjueC. NkansahE. SavkinaM. ThorpeR. YamaguchiT. WadhwaM. WangJ. WeiseM. Wolff-HolzE. AllamM. BahaaH. SayedM. Al-OballiA. AlshahraniA. BaekD. KimJ. ChuaH.M. GangakhedkarJ. JagtapM.P. LyaskovskyT. OkudairaS. OndeeW. SotomayorP.S. RicraJ.I.S. UviaseJ. AhmedF. RajendranY. DefendiH.G.T. ChoS.Y.O. QuA. AchaV. GencogluM. HoK. BaldrighiM. SchiestlM. WatsonK. SpitzerE. ChongS. FukushimaA. KangH-N. KnezevicI. PanteG. SimaoM. following participants of the WHO informal consultation on revision of guidelines on evaluation of similar biotherapeutic products Other participants Representatives of the Developing Countries Vaccine Manufacturers Network Representatives of the Emerging Biopharmaceutical Manufacturers Network Representatives of the IFPMA Representatives of IGBA Representative of the Latin American Association of Pharmaceutical Industries Representative of the Singapore Association of Pharmaceutical Industries WHO Secretariat WHO informal consultation on revision of guidelines on evaluation of similar biotherapeutic products, virtual meeting, 30 June – 2 July 2021.Biologicals2022761910.1016/j.biologicals.2022.03.00135466023
     [Google Scholar]
  94. SardellaM. BelcherG. LunguC. IgnoniT. CamisaM. StenverD.I. PorcelliP. D’AntuonoM. CastiglioneN.G. AdamsA. FurlanG. GrisoniI. HallS. BogaL. ManciniV. CiucaM. ChonziD. EdwardsB. MangoniA.A. TuccoriM. ProkofyevaE. De GregorioF. Bertazzoli Grabinski BroglioM. van LeeuwenB. KrugerP. RauschC. Le LouetH. Monitoring the manufacturing and quality of medicines: A fundamental task of pharmacovigilance.Ther. Adv. Drug Saf.20211210.1177/2042098621103843634394910
     [Google Scholar]
  95. CalvoB. Martinez-GorostiagaJ. EchevarriaE. The surge in biosimilars: Considerations for effective pharmacovigilance and EU regulation.Ther. Adv. Drug Saf.201891060160810.1177/204209861879044230283628
     [Google Scholar]
  96. KangH.N. ThorpeR. KnezevicI. BladesC.D.R.Z. Casas LevanoM. ChewJ.Y. ChilufyaM.B. ChirachanakulP. ChuaH.M. FarahaniA.V. GhobrialM.R.W. HabahbehS. HamelH. KimG.H. Perez RodriguezV. PutriD.E. RodgersJ. SavkinaM. SemeniukO. SrivastavaS. WadhwaM. YamaguchiT. Survey participants from 19 countries The regulatory landscape of biosimilars: WHO efforts and progress made from 2009 to 2019.Biologicals2020651910.1016/j.biologicals.2020.02.00532224101
     [Google Scholar]
  97. StebbingJ. MainwaringP.N. CuriglianoG. PegramM. LatymerM. BairA.H. RugoH.S. Understanding the role of comparative clinical studies in the development of oncology biosimilars.J. Clin. Oncol.202038101070108010.1200/JCO.19.0295332058846
     [Google Scholar]
  98. CalvertM.J. O’ConnorD.J. BaschE.M. Harnessing the patient voice in real-world evidence: The essential role of patient-reported outcomes.Nat. Rev. Drug Discov.2019181073173210.1038/d41573‑019‑00088‑731570837
     [Google Scholar]
  99. YooW.H. KangY.M. KimD.W. KangE.H. LeeY.A. SuhC.H. SungY.K. LeeS.H. GuD.H. LeeJ. ChoeJ.Y. Safety and effectiveness of etanercept biosimilar SB4 for rheumatic diseases in South Korea: Real-world post-marketing surveillance data.Rheumatol. Ther.202310232934110.1007/s40744‑022‑00515‑z36482248
     [Google Scholar]
  100. HarrisR. Oslo Medicines Initiative policy brief. World Health Organization.Regional Office for Europe2022
     [Google Scholar]
  101. BasTG Biosimilars for the next decade in Latin America: A window of opportunity.Expert Opin Biol Ther202323865966910.1080/14712598.2023.2245780
     [Google Scholar]
  102. da SilvaR.G.L. FischerB.B. SchaefferP.R. NovaesH.M.D. The industry of therapeutic monoclonal antibodies in Brazil: Public policies as instruments of technology upgrading.Sci. Public Policy2023501425810.1093/scipol/scac047
     [Google Scholar]
  103. AhmadyR. MehralianG. Technological capability building in Iranian biosimilar industry.Int. J. Technol. Learn. Innov. Dev.2020124251266
     [Google Scholar]
  104. KangJ. KimS.Y. VallejoD. HagemanT.S. WhiteD.R. BenetA. CoghlanJ. SenK.I. FordM. SavelievS. TolbertT.J. WeisD.D. SchwendemanS.P. RuotoloB.T. SchwendemanA. Multifaceted assessment of rituximab biosimilarity: The impact of glycan microheterogeneity on Fc function.Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm.202014611112410.1016/j.ejpb.2019.12.00331841688
     [Google Scholar]
  105. AgrawalM MishraS NayakG AggarwalD JoshiU. Knowledge, attitude and practice on biologicals and biosimilars among clinicians in radiotherapy department.J Pharm Care20238292
     [Google Scholar]
  106. UppalA. ChakrabartiR. ChirmuleN. RathoreA. AtoufF. Biopharmaceutical industry capability building in India: Report from a symposium.J. Pharm. Innov.2021•••1834849178
     [Google Scholar]
  107. PandaS. SinghP.K. MishraS. MitraS. PattnaikP. AdhikaryS.D. MohapatraR.K. Indian biosimilars and vaccines at crossroads–replicating the success of pharmagenerics.Vaccines202311111010.3390/vaccines1101011036679955
     [Google Scholar]
  108. ZhangK. LiuW. The current status, trend, and development strategies of Chinese biopharmaceutical industry with a challenging perspective.SAGE Open202010110.1177/2158244020901529
     [Google Scholar]
  109. BachuR.D. Abou-DahechM. BalajiS. BodduS.H.S. AmosS. SinghV. BabuR.J. TiwariA.K. Oncology biosimilars: New developments and future directions.Cancer Rep.2022511e172010.1002/cnr2.172036195576
     [Google Scholar]
  110. WalshG. WalshE. Biopharmaceutical benchmarks 2022.Nat. Biotechnol.202240121722176010.1038/s41587‑022‑01582‑x36471135
     [Google Scholar]
  111. Santos-NetoJF OliveiraFO HodelKV FonsecaL BadaróR MachadoBA Technological advancements in monoclonal antibodies.The Sci. World J.2021202110.1155/2021/6663708
     [Google Scholar]
  112. PriyaregaS. NatarajanR. An overview of biosimilars for cancer, diabetes mellitus, rheumatoid arthritis and other immune-mediated diseases approved between 2016 and 2021.Results in Chemistry2022410035610.1016/j.rechem.2022.100356
     [Google Scholar]
  113. LevinJM Biotechnology in the Time of COVID-19: Commentaries from the Front LineRosetta Books2020
     [Google Scholar]
  114. MroczkowskiT. The new players in life science innovation: best practices in R&D from around the world.Pearson Education2011
     [Google Scholar]
  115. MargolisS. Destined for failure: An analysis of the biologics price competition and innovation act of 2009.Colum Bus L Rev2013209
     [Google Scholar]
  116. BatelR. Biosimilar’s Growth in Pharmerging Markets: An Analysis of the Regulatory Environments. UWC Electronic Theses and Dissertations Repository2020
     [Google Scholar]
  117. PetrovaE. Innovation in the pharmaceutical industry: The process of drug discovery and development. Innovation and Marketing in the Pharmaceutical Industry: Emerging Practices, Research, and Policies.Springer20131981
     [Google Scholar]
  118. HutchingsC.J. KoglinM. OlsonW.C. MarshallF.H. Opportunities for therapeutic antibodies directed at G-protein-coupled receptors.Nat. Rev. Drug Discov.2017161178781010.1038/nrd.2017.9128706220
     [Google Scholar]
  119. CivoliF. KasinathA. CaiX.Y. WadhwaM. ExleyA. OldfieldP. AlvandkouhiS. SchaffarG. ChappellJ. BowsherR. DevanarayanV. MariniJ. RebarchakS. AndersonM. KoppenburgV. LesterT. Recommendations for the development and validation of immunogenicity assays in support of biosimilar programs.AAPS J.2020221710.1208/s12248‑019‑0386‑y31792633
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/adctra/10.2174/0126673371316219240929170401
Loading
Navigating Biosimilar Regulatory Pathways in Emerging Markets: Insights from BRICS Nations
Appl. Drug Resea., Clin. Trials and Regu. Affa. 10, e26673371316219 (2024); https://doi.org/10.2174/0126673371316219240929170401
/content/journals/adctra/10.2174/0126673371316219240929170401
/content/journals/adctra/10.2174/0126673371316219240929170401
Loading

Data & Media loading...


  • Article Type:     Review Article
Keyword(s): biologic drugs; biopharmaceutical; Biosimilars; BRICS; cancer; diabetes

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error
Please enter a valid_number test