Regulatory outlook from concept to commercialization of Biosimilars in Brazil market

Authors

  • Raj Shekhar Assistant Drugs Controller, CDSCO, Sub Zone, Bangalore, Government of India, 2nd Floor, Palace Road, Bangalore, India
  • P Muralidharan Assistant Drugs Controller, CDSCO, Sub Zone, Bangalore, Government of India, 2nd Floor, Palace Road, Bangalore, India
  • Namrata Hallur Assistant Drugs Controller, CDSCO, Sub Zone, Bangalore, Government of India, 2nd Floor, Palace Road, Bangalore, India
  • Sangamesh B Puranik Assistant Drugs Controller, CDSCO, Sub Zone, Bangalore, Government of India, 2nd Floor, Palace Road, Bangalore, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22270/ajprd.v8i2.672

Keywords:

Biosimilar; Biologics; ANVISA; Brazil.

Abstract

Biological products or biopharmaceuticals are medicinal products derived from living organism systems and manufactured by using modern biotechnology that differ widely from the conventional synthetic drugs. They are much larger and more complex molecules with inherent diversity; hence, different manufacturers cannot produce identical biological products, even with the same type of host expression system and equivalent technologies. Thus, biologics manufactured and marketed after patent expiration are usually referred to as biosimilars. Biosimilars endeavor to copy the original technology leading to the production of innovative biotechnological medicines to obtain a product which is similar to the reference product. These products reported to improve the treatment landscape for multiple diseases, particularly in the areas of oncology, blood disorders, rheumatology, endocrinology and are becoming choice of treatment regimen due to policy push by governments for it’s affordability without comprising on quality, safety and efficacy. Pharmaceutical exports from Brazil increased by around 41% between 2009 and 2013, touching a high of U.S. $1.516 billion. The valuation of Brazilian pharma markets has shown double digit growth in the past decade. Between 2012 and 2015, market valuations have increased from U.S. $25.2 billion to U.S. $35.3 billion.

Biosimilarity is based on a comprehensive comparability exercise wherein unavoidable clinical differences are evaluated and must meet equivalence or non-inferiority criteria. Biosimilars need to comply with different regulatory requirements for market authorization in different sites. There are several other related issues that need to be defined by the national authorities, such as interchangeability, labeling and prescribing information. The Brazilian health surveillance agency shadows the key principles established by the World Health Organization for the assessment of biosimilarity. However, the regulations also widen the gap by having standalone application pathway that does not require the usual comparability exercise with the reference product, originating non-biosimilar copies. Interchangeability and the use of nonproprietary names are not regulated. The objective of this manuscript is to explore the Brazilian Regulatory outlook from concept to commercialization of Biosimilars.

 

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Raj Shekhar, Assistant Drugs Controller, CDSCO, Sub Zone, Bangalore, Government of India, 2nd Floor, Palace Road, Bangalore, India

Assistant Drugs Controller, CDSCO, Sub Zone, Bangalore, Government of India, 2nd Floor, Palace Road, Bangalore, India

P Muralidharan, Assistant Drugs Controller, CDSCO, Sub Zone, Bangalore, Government of India, 2nd Floor, Palace Road, Bangalore, India

Assistant Drugs Controller, CDSCO, Sub Zone, Bangalore, Government of India, 2nd Floor, Palace Road, Bangalore, India

Namrata Hallur, Assistant Drugs Controller, CDSCO, Sub Zone, Bangalore, Government of India, 2nd Floor, Palace Road, Bangalore, India

Assistant Drugs Controller, CDSCO, Sub Zone, Bangalore, Government of India, 2nd Floor, Palace Road, Bangalore, India

Sangamesh B Puranik, Assistant Drugs Controller, CDSCO, Sub Zone, Bangalore, Government of India, 2nd Floor, Palace Road, Bangalore, India

Assistant Drugs Controller, CDSCO, Sub Zone, Bangalore, Government of India, 2nd Floor, Palace Road, Bangalore, India

References

1. Nicolas Peyret. Overview of Life Sciences in Brazil. Life Sciences Industry Team. 1-Scottish Enterprise. 2012: 1-47. (Accessed on 15.03.2020:https://www.elsi-project.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/elsi/brosch%C3%BCren/DD/Overview_of_Life_Sciences_in_Brazil_-_Scottish_Enterprise_-_11_2012.pdf)
2. World Population Review. Demographics of Brazil. (Accessed on 15.03.2020: http://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/brazil-population/)
3. Ravikiran. The Strong Growth of Pharma Markets in China, India, and Brazil. MARKET RESEARCH BLOG. September 5, 2017. (Accessed on 15.03.2020: https://blog.marketresearch.com/the-strong-growth-of-pharma-markets-in-china-india-and-brazil
4. High growth potential of Brazil pharma market. (Accessed on 14.08.2019: https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/011916/high-growth-potential-brazils-pharma-market.asp)
5. International positions. ANVISA. (Accessed on 15.03.2020: http://portal.anvisa.gov.br/international-position)
6. Amgen Inc. Biologics and Biosimilars-An overview. USA-BIO-106104(14). 2017; 1-31. (Accessed on 14.08.2019: http://www.amgen.com/pdfs/misc/Biologics_and_Biosimilars_Overview.pdf ).
7. Product lifecycle and evolution of biologics in Brazil. https://ipc.mit.edu/sites/default/files/documents/16-004.pdf
8. Clinical trials. ANVISA. (Accessed on 14.08.2019: http://portal.anvisa.gov.br/legislacao#/visualizar/29313).
9. Marketing authorization. ANVISA. (Accessed on 14.08.2019: http://portal.anvisa.gov.br/drugs).
10. Regulation of follow-on biological products in Brazil. GaBi online. 08/09/2017.(Accessed on 14.08.2019: http://www.gabionline.net/Reports/Regulation-of-follow-on-biological-products-in-Brazil).

Published

2020-04-15

How to Cite

Shekhar, R., Muralidharan, P., Hallur, N., & Puranik, S. B. (2020). Regulatory outlook from concept to commercialization of Biosimilars in Brazil market. Asian Journal of Pharmaceutical Research and Development, 8(2), 67–74. https://doi.org/10.22270/ajprd.v8i2.672