Skip to content
2000
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Applied Drug Research, Clinical Trials and Regulatory Affairs
  4. Fast Track Articles
  5. Fast Track Article
image of Navigating Biosimilar Regulatory Pathways in Emerging Markets: 
Insights from Brics Nations

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
2025-01-31

  • 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. Tichy E.M. Hoffman J.M. Suda K.J. Rim M.H. Tadrous M. Cuellar S. Clark J.S. Ward J. Schumock G.T. National trends in prescription drug expenditures and projections for 2022. Am. J. Health Syst. Pharm. 2022 79 14 1158 1172 10.1093/ajhp/zxac102 35385103
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Nandagopal A Shakeel Y Tirunagari M. Biosimilars: Current scenario and challenges in India. ACTA Pharmaceutica Sciencia 2018 56 1 10.23893/1307‑2080.APS.05601
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Zelenetz A.D. Ahmed I. Braud E.L. Cross J.D. Davenport-Ennis N. Dickinson B.D. Goldberg S.E. Gottlieb S. Johnson P.E. Lyman G.H. Markus R. Matulonis U.A. Reinke D. Li E.C. DeMartino J. Larsen J.K. Hoffman J.M. NCCN biosimilars white paper: Regulatory, scientific, and patient safety perspectives. J. Natl. Compr. Canc. Netw. 2011 9 Suppl. 4 S-1 S-22 10.6004/jnccn.2011.0136 21976013
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Tsiftsoglou A.S. Ruiz S. Schneider C.K. Development and regulation of biosimilars: Current status and future challenges. BioDrugs 2013 27 3 203 211 10.1007/s40259‑013‑0020‑y 23553340
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Bui L.A. Hurst S. Finch G.L. Ingram B. Jacobs I.A. Kirchhoff C.F. Ng C.K. Ryan A.M. Key considerations in the preclinical development of biosimilars. Drug Discov. Today 2015 20 Suppl. 1 3 15 10.1016/j.drudis.2015.03.011 25912284
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Blackstone E.A. Joseph P.F. The economics of biosimilars. Am. Health Drug Benefits 2013 6 8 469 478 24991376
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Rotenstein L.S. Ran N. Shivers J.P. Yarchoan M. Close K.L. Opportunities and challenges for biosimilars: What’s on the horizon in the global insulin market? Clin. Diabetes 2012 30 4 138 150 10.2337/diaclin.30.4.138
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Mulcahy A.W. Hlávka J.P. Case S.R. Biosimilar cost savings in the United States: Initial experience and future potential. Rand Health Q. 2018 7 4 3 30083415
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Booth F.W. Roberts C.K. Laye M.J. Lack of exercise is a major cause of chronic diseases. Compr. Physiol. 2012 2 2 1143 1211 10.1002/cphy.c110025 23798298
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Jakovljevic M. Liu Y. Cerda A. Simonyan M. Correia T. Mariita R.M. Kumara A.S. Garcia L. Krstic K. Osabohien R. Toan T.K. Adhikari C. Chuc N.T.K. Khatri R.B. Chattu V.K. Wang L. Wijeratne T. Kouassi E. Khan H.N. Varjacic M. The Global South political economy of health financing and spending landscape – History and presence. J. Med. Econ. 2021 24 sup1 25 33 10.1080/13696998.2021.2007691 34866543
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Balzer H. Askonas J. The Triple Helix after communism: Russia and China compared. Triple Helix 2016 3 1 1 31 10.1186/s40604‑015‑0031‑4
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Gereffi G Fernandez-Stark K Global value chain analysis: A primer. 2nd ed Duke Center on Globalization, Governance & Competitiveness (Duke CGGC) 2016
    [Google Scholar]
  13. von Zedtwitz M. Gassmann O. Market versus technology drive in R&D internationalization: Four different patterns of managing research and development. Res. Policy 2002 31 4 569 588 10.1016/S0048‑7333(01)00125‑1
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Zakaria N. Amelinckx A. Wilemon D. Working together apart? Building a knowledge‐sharing culture for global virtual teams. Creat. Innov. Manag. 2004 13 1 15 29 10.1111/j.1467‑8691.2004.00290.x
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Hunter B.M. Investor States: Global Health at The End of Aid. Elements in Global Development Studies Cambridge, United Kingdom Cambridge University Press 2023 10.1017/9781009209564
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Klarin A. Ray P.K. Political connections and strategic choices of emerging market firms. Int. J. Emerg. Mark. 2019 14 3 410 435 10.1108/IJOEM‑05‑2016‑0138
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Mpanza N.M. Godman B. Keele M.G. Matlala M. Trends in the utilization of medicines sold in the private sector post- registration in South Africa and the implications for similar countries. BMC Public Health 2023 23 1 192 10.1186/s12889‑023‑15021‑2 36709246
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Shadmi E. Chen Y. Dourado I. Faran-Perach I. Furler J. Hangoma P. Hanvoravongchai P. Obando C. Petrosyan V. Rao K.D. Ruano A.L. Shi L. de Souza L.E. Spitzer-Shohat S. Sturgiss E. Suphanchaimat R. Uribe M.V. Willems S. Health equity and COVID-19: Global perspectives. Int. J. Equity Health 2020 19 1 104 10.1186/s12939‑020‑01218‑z 32586388
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Dahlgren G Whitehead M European strategies for tackling social inequities in health: Levelling up Part 2. WHO Regional office for Europe Copenhagen 2006
    [Google Scholar]
  20. O’Neil S Naeve K Ved R An examination of the maternal health quality of care landscape in India. Math. Policy Res. 2017 2
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Mayosi B.M. Flisher A.J. Lalloo U.G. Sitas F. Tollman S.M. Bradshaw D. The burden of non-communicable diseases in South Africa. Lancet 2009 374 9693 934 947 10.1016/S0140‑6736(09)61087‑4 19709736
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Ahmad A-S. Olech E. McClellan J.E. Kirchhoff C.F. Development of biosimilars. Seminars in arthritis and rheumatism. Elsevier 2016
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Niazi S.K. Molecular Biosimilarity—An AI-Driven Paradigm Shift. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022 23 18 10690 10.3390/ijms231810690 36142600
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Cazap E. Jacobs I. McBride A. Popovian R. Sikora K. Global acceptance of biosimilars: Importance of regulatory consistency, education, and trust. Oncologist 2018 23 10 1188 1198 10.1634/theoncologist.2017‑0671 29769386
    [Google Scholar]
  25. de Assis M.R. Pinto V. Strengths and weaknesses of the Brazilian regulation on biosimilars: A critical view of the regulatory requirements for biosimilars in Brazil. Ther. Adv. Musculoskelet. Dis. 2018 10 12 253 259 10.1177/1759720X18809683 30515251
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Tsuruta L.R. Lopes dos Santos M. Moro A.M. Biosimilars advancements: Moving on to the future. Biotechnol. Prog. 2015 31 5 1139 1149 10.1002/btpr.2066 25708573
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Castañeda-Hernández G. Szekanecz Z. Mysler E. Azevedo V.F. Guzman R. Gutierrez M. Rodríguez W. Karateev D. Biopharmaceuticals for rheumatic diseases in Latin America, Europe, Russia, and India: Innovators, biosimilars, and intended copies. Joint Bone Spine 2014 81 6 471 477 10.1016/j.jbspin.2014.03.019 24956990
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Kumar R. Sigala S. Malgarini R.B. Pimpinella G. Pani L. Pecorelli S. Biosimilars: Regulatory status and implications across the world. J. Pharmacovigil. 2016 4 s3 4 10.4172/2329‑6887.S3‑002
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Rahalkar H. Cetintas H.C. Salek S. Quality, non-clinical and clinical considerations for biosimilar monoclonal antibody development: EU, WHO, USA, Canada, and BRICS-TM regulatory guidelines. Front. Pharmacol. 2018 9 1079 10.3389/fphar.2018.01079 30364154
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Krishnan A. Mody R. Malhotra H. Global regulatory landscape of biosimilars: Emerging and established market perspectives. Biosimilars 2015 ••• 19 32
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Yüce M. Sert F. Torabfam M. Parlar A. Gürel B. Çakır N. Dağlıkoca D.E. Khan M.A. Çapan Y. Fractionated charge variants of biosimilars: A review of separation methods, structural and functional analysis. Anal. Chim. Acta 2021 1152 238189 10.1016/j.aca.2020.12.064 33648647
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Wadhwa M. Knezevic I. Kang H.N. Thorpe R. Immunogenicity assessment of biotherapeutic products: An overview of assays and their utility. Biologicals 2015 43 5 298 306 10.1016/j.biologicals.2015.06.004 26144595
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Nicotera G. Sferrazza G. Serafino A. Pierimarchi P. The iterative development of medicines through the European medicine agency’s adaptive pathway approach. Front. Med. 2019 6 148 10.3389/fmed.2019.00148 31316991
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Azevedo V. Hassett B. Fonseca J.E. Atsumi T. Coindreau J. Jacobs I. Mahgoub E. O’Brien J. Singh E. Vicik S. Fitzpatrick B. Differentiating biosimilarity and comparability in biotherapeutics. Clin. Rheumatol. 2016 35 12 2877 2886 10.1007/s10067‑016‑3427‑2 27734233
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Dörner T. Strand V. Castañeda-Hernández G. Ferraccioli G. Isaacs J.D. Kvien T.K. Martin-Mola E. Mittendorf T. Smolen J.S. Burmester G.R. The role of biosimilars in the treatment of rheumatic diseases. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 2013 72 3 322 328 10.1136/annrheumdis‑2012‑202715 23253920
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Beck A. Wagner-Rousset E. Ayoub D. Van Dorsselaer A. Sanglier-Cianférani S. Characterization of therapeutic antibodies and related products. Anal. Chem. 2013 85 2 715 736 10.1021/ac3032355 23134362
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Schellekens H. Klinger E. Mühlebach S. Brin J.F. Storm G. Crommelin D.J.A. The therapeutic equivalence of complex drugs. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 2011 59 1 176 183 10.1016/j.yrtph.2010.09.021 20951177
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Sandra K. Vandenheede I. Sandra P. Modern chromatographic and mass spectrometric techniques for protein biopharmaceutical characterization. J. Chromatogr. A 2014 1335 81 103 10.1016/j.chroma.2013.11.057 24365115
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Láng J.A. Balogh Z.C. Nyitrai M.F. Juhász C. Gilicze A.K.B. Iliás A. Zólyomi Z. Bodor C. Rábai E. In vitro functional characterization of biosimilar therapeutic antibodies. Drug Discov. Today. Technol. 2020 37 41 50 10.1016/j.ddtec.2020.11.010 34895654
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Kabir E.R. Moreino S.S. Sharif Siam M.K. The breakthrough of biosimilars: A twist in the narrative of biological therapy. Biomolecules 2019 9 9 410 10.3390/biom9090410 31450637
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Pineda C. Castañeda Hernández G. Jacobs I.A. Alvarez D.F. Carini C. Assessing the immunogenicity of biopharmaceuticals. BioDrugs 2016 30 3 195 206 10.1007/s40259‑016‑0174‑5 27097915
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Ambrogelly A. Gozo S. Katiyar A. Dellatore S. Kune Y. Bhat R. Analytical comparability study of recombinant monoclonal antibody therapeutics. MAbs. Taylor & Francis 2018
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Wolff-Holz E. Tiitso K. Vleminckx C. Weise M. Evolution of the EU biosimilar framework: Past and future. BioDrugs 2019 33 6 621 634 10.1007/s40259‑019‑00377‑y 31541400
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Declerck P. Farouk Rezk M. The road from development to approval: Evaluating the body of evidence to confirm biosimilarity. Rheumatology 2017 56 Suppl. 4 iv4 iv13 10.1093/rheumatology/kex279 28903545
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Rahalkar H. Sheppard A. Salek S. Biosimilar development and review process in the BRICS-TM countries: Proposal for a standardized model to improve regulatory performance. Expert Rev. Clin. Pharmacol. 2022 15 2 215 236 10.1080/17512433.2022.2034498 35078378
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Kirchhoff C.F. Wang X.Z.M. Conlon H.D. Anderson S. Ryan A.M. Bose A. Biosimilars: Key regulatory considerations and similarity assessment tools. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2017 114 12 2696 2705 10.1002/bit.26438 28842986
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Visser J. Feuerstein I. Stangler T. Schmiederer T. Fritsch C. Schiestl M. Physicochemical and functional comparability between the proposed biosimilar rituximab GP2013 and originator rituximab. BioDrugs 2013 27 5 495 507 10.1007/s40259‑013‑0036‑3 23649935
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Lee J. Kang H.A. Bae J.S. Kim K.D. Lee K.H. Lim K.J. Evaluation of analytical similarity between trastuzumab biosimilar CT-P6 and reference product using statistical analyses. Taylor & Francis. 2018
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Böhme I. Beck-Sickinger A.G. Illuminating the life of GPCRs. Cell Commun. Signal. 2009 7 1 16 10.1186/1478‑811X‑7‑16 19602276
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Zhou Q. Qiu H. The mechanistic impact of N-glycosylation on stability, pharmacokinetics, and immunogenicity of therapeutic proteins. J. Pharm. Sci. 2019 108 4 1366 1377 10.1016/j.xphs.2018.11.029 30471292
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Bhattacharya S. Rathore A.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. 2023 234 115527 10.1016/j.jpba.2023.115527 37364451
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Cao D. Deng C. Wang G. Mei X. Xie J. Liu Y. Liu Y. Yang Y. Li S. Liu C. Physicochemical and functional similarity assessment between proposed bevacizumab biosimilar BAT1706 and reference bevacizumab. Drugs R D. 2023 23 3 267 288 10.1007/s40268‑023‑00432‑8 37479945
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Ramachandra B. Development of impurity profiling methods using modern analytical techniques. Crit. Rev. Anal. Chem. 2017 47 1 24 36 10.1080/10408347.2016.1169913 27070830
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Courts and pharmaceutical patents: From formalist positivism to the emergence of a global law. Filho, C.S.; Ido, V.H.P., Eds.; Access to Medicines and Vaccines: Implementing Flexibilities Under Intellectual Property Law. Springer International Publishing 2022
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Chhabra H. Mouslim M.C. Kashiramka S. Rathore A.S. Dynamics of biosimilar uptake in emerging markets. Expert Opin. Biol. Ther. 2022 22 6 679 688 10.1080/14712598.2022.2076557 35535988
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Blandizzi C. Meroni P.L. Lapadula G. Comparing originator biologics and biosimilars: A review of the relevant issues. Clin. Ther. 2017 39 5 1026 1039 10.1016/j.clinthera.2017.03.014 28416374
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Luo X. Liu Q. Zhou Z. Yi L. Peng L. Wan X. Zeng X. Tan C. Li S. 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. 2022 13 832215 10.3389/fphar.2022.832215 35517823
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Rahalkar H. Evaluation of the Regulatory Requirements for Development and Approval of Biosimilar Medicines in the BRICS-TM Countries: Improving Patients’. Access. 2021
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Simoens S. Abdallah K. Barbier L. Lacosta T.B. Blonda A. Car E. Claessens Z. Desmet T. De Sutter E. Govaerts L. Janssens R. Lalova T. Moorkens E. Saesen R. Schoefs E. Vandenplas Y. Van Overbeeke E. Verbaanderd C. Huys I. How to balance valuable innovation with affordable access to medicines in Belgium? Front. Pharmacol. 2022 13 960701 10.3389/fphar.2022.960701 36188534
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Luo Y. A coopetition perspective of global competition. J. World Bus. 2007 42 2 129 144 10.1016/j.jwb.2006.08.007
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Pearce F. Lin L. Teo E. Ng K. Khoo D. Health technology assessment and its use in drug policies: Singapore. Value Health Reg. Issues 2019 18 176 183 10.1016/j.vhri.2018.03.007 29954696
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Ventola C.L. Evaluation of biosimilars for formulary inclusion: Factors for consideration by P&T committees. P&T 2015 40 10 680 689 26535024
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Vogler S. Paris V. Ferrario A. Wirtz V.J. de Joncheere K. Schneider P. Pedersen H.B. Dedet G. Babar Z.U.D. How can pricing and reimbursement policies improve affordable access to medicines? Lessons learned from European countries. Appl. Health Econ. Health Policy 2017 15 3 307 321 10.1007/s40258‑016‑0300‑z 28063134
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Stevenson J.G. Popovian R. Jacobs I. Hurst S. Shane L.G. Biosimilars: Practical considerations for pharmacists. Ann. Pharmacother. 2017 51 7 590 602 10.1177/1060028017690743 28176529
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Willke R.J. Neumann P.J. Garrison L.P. Jr Ramsey S.D. Review of recent US value frameworks—a health economics approach: An ISPOR Special Task Force report. Value Health 2018 21 2 155 160 10.1016/j.jval.2017.12.011 29477393
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Rahalkar H. Sheppard A. Lopez-Morales C.A. Lobo L. Salek S. Challenges faced by the biopharmaceutical industry in the development and marketing authorization of biosimilar medicines in BRICS-TM countries: An exploratory study. Pharmaceut. Med. 2021 35 4 235 251 10.1007/s40290‑021‑00395‑8 34292558
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Li X. Recent applications of quantitative mass spectrometry in biopharmaceutical process development and manufacturing. J. Pharm. Biomed. Anal. 2023 234 115581 10.1016/j.jpba.2023.115581 37494866
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Kanikaram Satyanarayana K.S. Sadhana Srivastava S.S. Promoting access to healthcare through biosimilars: Addressing intellectual property rights and regulatory barriers. Intellectual property issues in biotechnology CABI Wallingford UK 2016 193 228
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Sarwal R Prasad U Gopal KM Kalal S Kaur D Kumar A Investment opportunities in India's healthcare sector. NITI Aayog 2021 10.31219/osf.io/rtup2
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Mazumdar-Shaw K. Leveraging affordable innovation to tackle India’s healthcare challenge. IIMB Manag. Rev. 2018 30 1 37 50 10.1016/j.iimb.2017.11.003
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Rathore A.S. Stevenson J.G. Chhabra H. Maharana C. The global landscape on interchangeability of biosimilars. Expert Opin. Biol. Ther. 2022 22 2 133 148 10.1080/14712598.2021.1889511 33567923
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Buick A. Approaches to the Implementation of the Protection of Submitted Test Data. Intellectual Property Rights in Pharmaceutical Test Data: Origins, Globalisation and Impact. Springer 2023 139 173
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Mueller JM The tiger awakens: The tumultuous transformation of India's patent system and the rise of Indian pharmaceutical innovation. U Pitt L Rev 2006 68 491
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Mercurio B. Upreti P.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. 2023 10 2 lsad017 10.1093/jlb/lsad017 37476179
    [Google Scholar]
  75. Mike J.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. 2019 22 3-4 162 204 10.1111/jwip.12123
    [Google Scholar]
  76. Neumann P.J. Cohen J.T. Ollendorf D.A. The right price: A value-based prescription for drug costs. Oxford University Press 2021 10.1093/oso/9780197512883.001.0001
    [Google Scholar]
  77. Jagun C. Strategies for Compliance with Government Regulation in a Pharmaceutical Company. Walden University 2018
    [Google Scholar]
  78. Garcia C.A. Stroud J. Ships in the night: Resolving administrative conflict between fda-and patent-related legislation. Am UL Rev. 2018 68 1111
    [Google Scholar]
  79. Mercurio B. Kim D. Contemporary issues in pharmaceutical patent law: Setting the framework and exploring policy options. Taylor & Francis 2017 10.4324/9781315677972
    [Google Scholar]
  80. Krishna PS Nagabhushanam M Ramakrishna G Current scenario of pharmacovigilance in india and its comparision with usa and eu. 2021
    [Google Scholar]
  81. Murff H.J. Patel V.L. Hripcsak G. Bates D.W. Detecting adverse events for patient safety research: A review of current methodologies. J. Biomed. Inform. 2003 36 1-2 131 143 10.1016/j.jbi.2003.08.003 14552854
    [Google Scholar]
  82. Biswas P. Pharmacovigilance in Asia. J. Pharmacol. Pharmacother. 2013 4 1_suppl Suppl. 1 S7 S19 10.4103/0976‑500X.120941 24347987
    [Google Scholar]
  83. Felix T. Jordan J.B. Akers C. Patel B. Drago D. Current state of biologic pharmacovigilance in the European Union: Improvements are needed. Expert Opin. Drug Saf. 2019 18 3 231 240 10.1080/14740338.2019.1577818 30714424
    [Google Scholar]
  84. Wang W. Munsaka M. Buchanan J. Li J. Quantitative Drug Safety and Benefit Risk Evaluation: Practical and Cross-Disciplinary Approaches. CRC Press 2021 10.1201/9780429488801
    [Google Scholar]
  85. Weekes L. Optimizing use of biologic medicines using a quality use of medicines approach. Biologics, Biosimilars, and Biobetters: An Introduction for Pharmacists. Physicians, and Other Health Practitioners 2020 237 251
    [Google Scholar]
  86. Mysler E. Pineda C. Horiuchi T. Singh E. Mahgoub E. Coindreau J. Jacobs I. Clinical and regulatory perspectives on biosimilar therapies and intended copies of biologics in rheumatology. Rheumatol. Int. 2016 36 5 613 625 10.1007/s00296‑016‑3444‑0 26920148
    [Google Scholar]
  87. Rathore A.S. Bhargava A. Regulatory considerations in biosimilars: Middle East and Africa regions. Prep. Biochem. Biotechnol. 2021 51 8 731 737 10.1080/10826068.2021.1959346 34365902
    [Google Scholar]
  88. Bode G Starck-Lantova P. Future of regulatory safety assessments. Drug Discovery and Evaluation: Methods in Clinical Pharmacology Springer 2020 1148 1168 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑68864‑0_71
    [Google Scholar]
  89. Iqbal Z. Sadaf S. Biosimilars: A comparative study of regulatory, safety and pharmacovigilance monograph in the developed and developing economies. J. Pharm. Pharm. Sci. 2022 25 149 182 10.18433/jpps32433 35439428
    [Google Scholar]
  90. Simon J.W. Risk Management for Medical Device Manufacturers. Quality Press 2022
    [Google Scholar]
  91. Makanjee C.R. Diagnostic Medical Imaging Services with Myriads of Ethical Dilemmas in a Contemporary Healthcare Context: Is Artificial Intelligence the Solution? Medical Imaging Methods. CRC Press 2021 1 44 10.1201/9781003112068‑1
    [Google Scholar]
  92. Raj N. Fernandes S. Charyulu N.R. Dubey A. G S R. Hebbar S. 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. 2019 10 2042098619865413 10.1177/2042098619865413 31384423
    [Google Scholar]
  93. Wadhwa M. Kang H.N. Thorpe R. Knezevic I. Aprea P. Bielsky M.C. Ekman N. Heim H.K. Joung J. Kurki P. Lacana E. Njue C. Nkansah E. Savkina M. Thorpe R. Yamaguchi T. Wadhwa M. Wang J. Weise M. Wolff-Holz E. Allam M. Bahaa H. Sayed M. Al-Oballi A. Alshahrani A. Baek D. Kim J. Chua H.M. Gangakhedkar J. Jagtap M.P. Lyaskovsky T. Okudaira S. Ondee W. Sotomayor P.S. Ricra J.I.S. Uviase J. Ahmed F. Rajendran Y. Defendi H.G.T. Cho S.Y.O. Qu A. Acha V. Gencoglu M. Ho K. Baldrighi M. Schiestl M. Watson K. Spitzer E. Chong S. Fukushima A. Kang H-N. Knezevic I. Pante G. Simao M. 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. Biologicals 2022 76 1 9 10.1016/j.biologicals.2022.03.001 35466023
    [Google Scholar]
  94. Sardella M. Belcher G. Lungu C. Ignoni T. Camisa M. Stenver D.I. Porcelli P. D’Antuono M. Castiglione N.G. Adams A. Furlan G. Grisoni I. Hall S. Boga L. Mancini V. Ciuca M. Chonzi D. Edwards B. Mangoni A.A. Tuccori M. Prokofyeva E. De Gregorio F. Bertazzoli Grabinski Broglio M. van Leeuwen B. Kruger P. Rausch C. Le Louet H. Monitoring the manufacturing and quality of medicines: A fundamental task of pharmacovigilance. Ther. Adv. Drug Saf. 2021 12 10.1177/20420986211038436 34394910
    [Google Scholar]
  95. Calvo B. Martinez-Gorostiaga J. Echevarria E. The surge in biosimilars: Considerations for effective pharmacovigilance and EU regulation. Ther. Adv. Drug Saf. 2018 9 10 601 608 10.1177/2042098618790442 30283628
    [Google Scholar]
  96. Kang H.N. Thorpe R. Knezevic I. Blades C.D.R.Z. Casas Levano M. Chew J.Y. Chilufya M.B. Chirachanakul P. Chua H.M. Farahani A.V. Ghobrial M.R.W. Habahbeh S. Hamel H. Kim G.H. Perez Rodriguez V. Putri D.E. Rodgers J. Savkina M. Semeniuk O. Srivastava S. Wadhwa M. Yamaguchi T. Survey participants from 19 countries The regulatory landscape of biosimilars: WHO efforts and progress made from 2009 to 2019. Biologicals 2020 65 1 9 10.1016/j.biologicals.2020.02.005 32224101
    [Google Scholar]
  97. Stebbing J. Mainwaring P.N. Curigliano G. Pegram M. Latymer M. Bair A.H. Rugo H.S. Understanding the role of comparative clinical studies in the development of oncology biosimilars. J. Clin. Oncol. 2020 38 10 1070 1080 10.1200/JCO.19.02953 32058846
    [Google Scholar]
  98. Calvert M.J. O’Connor D.J. Basch E.M. Harnessing the patient voice in real-world evidence: The essential role of patient-reported outcomes. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2019 18 10 731 732 10.1038/d41573‑019‑00088‑7 31570837
    [Google Scholar]
  99. Yoo W.H. Kang Y.M. Kim D.W. Kang E.H. Lee Y.A. Suh C.H. Sung Y.K. Lee S.H. Gu D.H. Lee J. Choe J.Y. Safety and effectiveness of etanercept biosimilar SB4 for rheumatic diseases in South Korea: Real-world post-marketing surveillance data. Rheumatol. Ther. 2023 10 2 329 341 10.1007/s40744‑022‑00515‑z 36482248
    [Google Scholar]
  100. Harris R. Oslo Medicines Initiative policy brief. World Health Organization. Regional Office for Europe 2022
    [Google Scholar]
  101. Bas TG Biosimilars for the next decade in Latin America: A window of opportunity. Expert Opin Biol Ther 2023 23 8 659 669 10.1080/14712598.2023.2245780
    [Google Scholar]
  102. da Silva R.G.L. Fischer B.B. Schaeffer P.R. Novaes H.M.D. The industry of therapeutic monoclonal antibodies in Brazil: Public policies as instruments of technology upgrading. Sci. Public Policy 2023 50 1 42 58 10.1093/scipol/scac047
    [Google Scholar]
  103. Ahmady R. Mehralian G. Technological capability building in Iranian biosimilar industry. Int. J. Technol. Learn. Innov. Dev. 2020 12 4 251 266
    [Google Scholar]
  104. Kang J. Kim S.Y. Vallejo D. Hageman T.S. White D.R. Benet A. Coghlan J. Sen K.I. Ford M. Saveliev S. Tolbert T.J. Weis D.D. Schwendeman S.P. Ruotolo B.T. Schwendeman A. Multifaceted assessment of rituximab biosimilarity: The impact of glycan microheterogeneity on Fc function. Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm. 2020 146 111 124 10.1016/j.ejpb.2019.12.003 31841688
    [Google Scholar]
  105. Agrawal M Mishra S Nayak G Aggarwal D Joshi U. Knowledge, attitude and practice on biologicals and biosimilars among clinicians in radiotherapy department. J Pharm Care 2023 82 92
    [Google Scholar]
  106. Uppal A. Chakrabarti R. Chirmule N. Rathore A. Atouf F. Biopharmaceutical industry capability building in India: Report from a symposium. J. Pharm. Innov. 2021 ••• 1 8 34849178
    [Google Scholar]
  107. Panda S. Singh P.K. Mishra S. Mitra S. Pattnaik P. Adhikary S.D. Mohapatra R.K. Indian biosimilars and vaccines at crossroads–replicating the success of pharmagenerics. Vaccines 2023 11 1 110 10.3390/vaccines11010110 36679955
    [Google Scholar]
  108. Zhang K. Liu W. The current status, trend, and development strategies of Chinese biopharmaceutical industry with a challenging perspective. SAGE Open 2020 10 1 10.1177/2158244020901529
    [Google Scholar]
  109. Bachu R.D. Abou-Dahech M. Balaji S. Boddu S.H.S. Amos S. Singh V. Babu R.J. Tiwari A.K. Oncology biosimilars: New developments and future directions. Cancer Rep. 2022 5 11 e1720 10.1002/cnr2.1720 36195576
    [Google Scholar]
  110. Walsh G. Walsh E. Biopharmaceutical benchmarks 2022. Nat. Biotechnol. 2022 40 12 1722 1760 10.1038/s41587‑022‑01582‑x 36471135
    [Google Scholar]
  111. Santos-Neto JF Oliveira FO Hodel KV Fonseca L Badaró R Machado BA Technological advancements in monoclonal antibodies. The Sci. World J. 2021 2021 10.1155/2021/6663708
    [Google Scholar]
  112. Priyarega S. Natarajan R. An overview of biosimilars for cancer, diabetes mellitus, rheumatoid arthritis and other immune-mediated diseases approved between 2016 and 2021. Results in Chemistry 2022 4 100356 10.1016/j.rechem.2022.100356
    [Google Scholar]
  113. Levin JM Biotechnology in the Time of COVID-19: Commentaries from the Front Line Rosetta Books 2020
    [Google Scholar]
  114. Mroczkowski T. The new players in life science innovation: best practices in R&D from around the world. Pearson Education 2011
    [Google Scholar]
  115. Margolis S. Destined for failure: An analysis of the biologics price competition and innovation act of 2009. Colum Bus L Rev 2013 209
    [Google Scholar]
  116. Batel R. Biosimilar’s Growth in Pharmerging Markets: An Analysis of the Regulatory Environments. UWC Electronic Theses and Dissertations Repository 2020
    [Google Scholar]
  117. Petrova E. Innovation in the pharmaceutical industry: The process of drug discovery and development. Innovation and Marketing in the Pharmaceutical Industry: Emerging Practices, Research, and Policies. Springer 2013 19 81
    [Google Scholar]
  118. Hutchings C.J. Koglin M. Olson W.C. Marshall F.H. Opportunities for therapeutic antibodies directed at G-protein-coupled receptors. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2017 16 11 787 810 10.1038/nrd.2017.91 28706220
    [Google Scholar]
  119. Civoli F. Kasinath A. Cai X.Y. Wadhwa M. Exley A. Oldfield P. Alvandkouhi S. Schaffar G. Chappell J. Bowsher R. Devanarayan V. Marini J. Rebarchak S. Anderson M. Koppenburg V. Lester T. Recommendations for the development and validation of immunogenicity assays in support of biosimilar programs. AAPS J. 2020 22 1 7 10.1208/s12248‑019‑0386‑y 31792633
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/adctra/10.2174/0126673371316219240929170401
Loading
Navigating Biosimilar Regulatory Pathways in Emerging Markets: 
Insights from Brics Nations
Bentham Science Publishers ; 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
Keywords: intricate ; transformative ; policymakers ; Biosimilars ; reimbursement ; brics ; emerging

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