A Sept. 21 U.S. FDA advisory committee meeting will either be a “Hail Mary” or a last gasp of life for ITCA-650, a twice-yearly implantable exenatide-device combination product intended to improve glycemic control in adults with type 2 diabetes.
If the U.S. FDA has its way, biosimilars and interchangeable biosimilars would no longer be a difference with a distinction – at least when it comes to labeling. Instead of distinguishing between the two, the agency is recommending that the labeling for both follow-ons include a “biosimilarity statement.”
The U.S. FTC put brand drug companies on notice Sept. 14 when the commissioners unanimously voted, 3-0, to issue a policy statement recognizing that improperly listed patents in the FDA’s Orange Book “may constitute an unfair method of competition.”
Supporting their conclusions with data from the same phase III study, the EMA’s Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use adopted a positive opinion for extending the use of Oncopeptides AB’s Pepaxti (melflufen) to earlier lines of treating relapsed, refractory multiple myeloma even as the FDA dug in its heels about withdrawing the drug from the U.S. market.
To streamline the development of biosimilars and align it with current analytical science, regulators across the globe are reevaluating a routine requirement for comparative clinical efficacy studies for biosimilar candidates.
Instead of the bivalent COVID-19 vaccines comprising both the original and omicron BA.4/BA.5 SARS-CoV-2 strains that have been in use in the U.S. since April, the CDC’s Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices voted 13-1 Sept. 12 to recommend the universal use of updated monovalent XBB-containing COVID-19 vaccines as authorized or approved by the FDA.
If the modification to Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc.’s $326 million contract with the U.S. Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority is anything to go by, pricing clauses could once again become a common feature in biopharma contracts involving government R&D funding.
While the U.S. FDA’s preclinical and clinical trial framework is generally well-suited to adapt to the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in developing new drugs, its regulatory framework for medical devices that incorporate evolving AI leaves a lot to be desired, according to Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), the ranking member of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pension Committee.
Forget location. It’s timing, timing, timing when it comes to escaping the first round of U.S. Medicare price negotiations due to pending biosimilar competition. Under the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), only single-source drugs that have been approved for a specific length of time are subject to the forced negotiations, which focus on drugs with the biggest Medicare spend, not necessarily the highest price tag. Since the IRA gives biologics a 12-year safe harbor from negotiations, which aligns with the biologic exclusivity provided by the Biologic Price Competition and Innovation Act, it creates a scenario in which the innovator could be facing negotiations just as its first biosimilar competition prepares to launch. That creates a lot of what-ifs.