Waiving in vivo studies for monoclonal antibody biosimilar development: National and global challenges

ABSTRACT Biosimilars are biological medicinal products that contain a version of the active substance of an already authorised original biological medicinal product (the innovator or reference product). The first approved biosimilar medicines were small proteins, and more recently biosimilar versions of innovator monoclonal antibody (mAb) drugs have entered development as patents on these more complex proteins expire. In September 2013, the first biosimilar mAb, infliximab, was authorised in Europe. In March 2015, the first biosimilar (Zarxio™, filgrastim-sndz, Sandoz) was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration; however, to date no mAb biosimilars have been approved in the US. There are currently major differences between how biosimilars are regulated in different parts of the world, leading to substantial variability in the amount of in vivo nonclinical toxicity testing required to support clinical development and marketing of biosimilars. There are approximately 30 national and international guidelines on biosimilar development and this number is growing. The European Union's guidance describes an approach that enables biosimilars to enter clinical trials based on robust in vitro data alone; in contrast, the World Health Organization's guidance is interpreted globally to mean in vivo toxicity studies are mandatory. We reviewed our own experience working in the global regulatory environment, surveyed current practice, determined drivers for nonclinical in vivo studies with biosimilar mAbs and shared data on practice and study design for 25 marketed and as yet unmarketed biosimilar mAbs that have been in development in the past 5y. These data showed a variety of nonclinical in vivo approaches, and also demonstrated the practical challenges faced in obtaining regulatory approval for clinical trials based on in vitro data alone. The majority of reasons for carrying out nonclinical in vivo studies were not based on scientific rationale, and therefore the authors have made recommendations for a data-driven approach to the toxicological assessment of mAb biosimilars that minimises unnecessary use of animals and can be used across all regions of the world.

[1]  P. Bugelski,et al.  Concordance of preclinical and clinical pharmacology and toxicology of monoclonal antibodies and fusion proteins: soluble targets , 2012, British journal of pharmacology.

[2]  B. Scallon,et al.  Contribution of FcRn binding to intestinal uptake of IgG in suckling rat pups and human FcRn-transgenic mice. , 2013, American journal of physiology. Gastrointestinal and liver physiology.

[3]  GUIDELINE ON SIMILAR BIOLOGICAL MEDICINAL PRODUCTS CONTAINING BIOTECHNOLOGY-DERIVED PROTEINS AS ACTIVE SUBSTANCE: NON-CLINICAL AND CLINICAL ISSUES , 2011 .

[4]  P. Bugelski,et al.  Concordance of preclinical and clinical pharmacology and toxicology of therapeutic monoclonal antibodies and fusion proteins: cell surface targets , 2012, British journal of pharmacology.

[5]  M. Leach,et al.  Comparative Nonclinical Assessments of the Proposed Biosimilar PF-05280014 and Trastuzumab (Herceptin®) , 2014, BioDrugs.

[6]  Martin Schiestl,et al.  Acceptable changes in quality attributes of glycosylated biopharmaceuticals , 2011, Nature Biotechnology.

[7]  Ian Ragan,et al.  Preclinical development of monoclonal antibodies , 2009, mAbs.

[8]  J. Chaparro-Riggers,et al.  The neonatal Fc receptor (FcRn) binds independently to both sites of the IgG homodimer with identical affinity , 2015, mAbs.

[9]  C. Schneider,et al.  Biosimilars entering the clinic without animal studies , 2014, mAbs.

[10]  I. Sandlie,et al.  Cross-species Binding Analyses of Mouse and Human Neonatal Fc Receptor Show Dramatic Differences in Immunoglobulin G and Albumin Binding* , 2009, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[11]  Huub Schellekens,et al.  Contribution of animal studies to evaluate the similarity of biosimilars to reference products. , 2015, Drug discovery today.

[12]  Jennifer Sims,et al.  The design of chronic toxicology studies of monoclonal antibodies: implications for the reduction in use of non-human primates. , 2012, Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP.

[13]  M. Leach,et al.  Comparative Nonclinical Assessments of the Proposed Biosimilar PF-05280586 and Rituximab (MabThera®) , 2014, Toxicologic pathology.

[14]  Joy A. Cavagnaro,et al.  Preclinical safety evaluation of biotechnology-derived pharmaceuticals , 2002, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[15]  J. Bussiere Species selection considerations for preclinical toxicology studies for biotherapeutics. , 2008, Expert opinion on drug metabolism & toxicology.

[16]  R. Ober,et al.  Differences in promiscuity for antibody-FcRn interactions across species: implications for therapeutic antibodies. , 2001, International immunology.

[17]  Guideline on similar biological medicinal products containing monoclonal antibodies – non-clinical and clinical issues , 2012 .

[18]  Carol F. Kirchhoff,et al.  Key considerations in the preclinical development of biosimilars. , 2015, Drug discovery today.

[19]  Ellen H.M. Moors,et al.  The value of non-human primates in the development of monoclonal antibodies , 2013, Nature Biotechnology.

[20]  Kathryn L Chapman,et al.  Preclinical safety testing of monoclonal antibodies: the significance of species relevance , 2007, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[21]  H. Malhotra,et al.  Global regulatory landscape of biosimilars: emerging and established market perspectives , 2015 .