Literature DB >> 17633790

The FDA's assessment of follow-on protein products: a historical perspective.

Janet Woodcock1, Joseph Griffin, Rachel Behrman, Barry Cherney, Terrie Crescenzi, Blair Fraser, Dena Hixon, Christopher Joneckis, Steven Kozlowski, Amy Rosenberg, Lewis Schrager, Emily Shacter, Robert Temple, Keith Webber, Helen Winkle.   

Abstract

The scientific and regulatory issues that are associated with the possible introduction of 'follow-on' versions of protein drug products are the topic of considerable debate at present. Because of the differences between protein drug products and small-molecule drugs, the development of follow-on versions of protein products presents more complex scientific challenges than those presented by the development of generic versions of small-molecule drugs. Here, with a view to illustrating the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) scientific reasoning and experience in this area, we discuss past examples of the FDA's actions involving the evaluation of various types of follow-on and second-generation protein products and within-product manufacturing changes. The FDA believes its evaluation of the safety and effectiveness of follow-on protein products will evolve as scientific and technological advances in product characterization and manufacturing continue to reduce some of the complexity and uncertainty that are inherent in the manufacturing of protein products.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17633790     DOI: 10.1038/nrd2307

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nat Rev Drug Discov        ISSN: 1474-1776            Impact factor:   84.694


  33 in total

Review 1.  The advent of biosimilar therapies in rheumatology--"O brave new world".

Authors:  Morton A Scheinberg; Jonathan Kay
Journal:  Nat Rev Rheumatol       Date:  2012-06-05       Impact factor: 20.543

2.  Gearing up for follow-on biologics.

Authors:  Bethan Hughes
Journal:  Nat Rev Drug Discov       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 84.694

3.  Pharmacokinetic similarity of biologics: analysis using nonlinear mixed-effects modeling.

Authors:  A Dubois; S Gsteiger; S Balser; E Pigeolet; J L Steimer; G Pillai; F Mentré
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2011-12-28       Impact factor: 6.875

4.  European Medicines Agency workshop on biosimilar monoclonal antibodies: July 2, 2009, London, UK.

Authors:  Janice M Reichert; Alain Beck; Harish Iyer
Journal:  MAbs       Date:  2009-09-25       Impact factor: 5.857

Review 5.  Pharmacy and pharmacology of biosimilars.

Authors:  I Krämer
Journal:  J Endocrinol Invest       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 4.256

6.  Clustered patterns of species origins of nature-derived drugs and clues for future bioprospecting.

Authors:  Feng Zhu; Chu Qin; Lin Tao; Xin Liu; Zhe Shi; Xiaohua Ma; Jia Jia; Ying Tan; Cheng Cui; Jinshun Lin; Chunyan Tan; Yuyang Jiang; Yuzong Chen
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-07-18       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  Comparability analysis of protein therapeutics by bottom-up LC-MS with stable isotope-tagged reference standards.

Authors:  Anton V Manuilov; Czeslaw H Radziejewski; David H Lee
Journal:  MAbs       Date:  2011-07-01       Impact factor: 5.857

8.  Why an abbreviated FDA pathway for biosimilars is overhyped.

Authors:  Henry I Miller
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2011-09-08       Impact factor: 54.908

Review 9.  Biosimilars of biological drug therapies: regulatory, clinical and commercial considerations.

Authors:  George Dranitsaris; Eitan Amir; Kristine Dorward
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2011-08-20       Impact factor: 9.546

Review 10.  Neutrophil biology and the next generation of myeloid growth factors.

Authors:  David C Dale
Journal:  J Natl Compr Canc Netw       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 11.908

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.