In light of BioApproval's Chris Webster’s recent publication and future presentation at the upcoming DIA Biosimilars conference, I spoke with him to learn more about the "Confirmation of Sufficient Likeness" approach and the scientific evidence that has informed this proposed biosimilar regulatory paradigm shift away from Totality of Evidence.
As the impact of extractables and leachables on product stability gained greater visibility in relation to single-use technology (SUT), GE Healthcare and Sealed Air formed a partnership to address the issues with the current film structures in today’s biopharma market.
Overall, the growth in Asia’s bioprocessing capacity, particularly in China, has been impressive, albeit from a low baseline. Capacity growth over the past five years has been over 20 percent annually. New facility construction and expansions reflect the demand for biologics for domestic consumption, while other facilities are beginning to develop manufacturing strategies for GMP production for major markets, with capacity involving commercial-scale stainless steel and single-use bioreactors.
Fortem film development is an important investment by GE Healthcare, as it helps meet the industry need for a fully characterized platform film across all bioprocessing applications with supply chain transparency as a focal point.
Even though the FDA has argued quite passionately against the need for biologics standards, there are several reasons why I hesitate to embrace their arguments that having these standards in place (and requiring they be met) could be harmful to biosimilars.
Exploring the benefits, challenges, and future of disposable systems in biosimilar manufacturing.
Though it’s only natural to expect animated scientific discussion between the FDA and USP which have long been partners-in-science, I found myself caught off-guard by just how firmly the FDA has been putting its foot down and making its thoughts known on the role certain standards — in particular, USP monographs — should (or should not play) in biologics development.
Learn how a partnership built on technical expertise and trust is helping to secure the supply of a single-use film built for bioprocessing.
Viral clearance studies are a critical part of the production of biologics. However, performing studies that are accurate and cost-effective can be challenging. Here are seven things to consider while performing your next chromatography viral clearance study.
During our conversation about the FDA’s most recent comparability guidance, I picked one USP expert's brain about the challenges of establishing a biosimilar analytical development program, as well as why certain types of data may be more difficult to come by than others. These challenges are responsible for further complicating the question about which types of data are still necessary, and why.
In this first of what will be a two-part article, USP's Fouad Atouf highlights the challenges presented by the FDA’s newest guidance while remaining optimistic that the large amount of data recommended today will open doors to more efficient development in the (hopefully) near future.
Despite the importance of the process the FDA is outlining in the guidance, I’ve surprisingly heard little chatter — positive or negative — about what the agency is now outlining and what this may mean for biosimilars and the biosimilar regulatory paradigm moving forward. Here are a couple of the biggest takeaways to note.
Mixed-mode resins are often used when unimodal resins fall short of providing the required process productivity and/or process economics. To overcome this deficiency, Bio-Rad developed the Nuvia aPrime 4A Resin with an optimal balance of ion exchange and hydrophobic interactions to deliver simultaneous purity and yield of therapeutic proteins and monoclonal antibodies that are typically difficult to purify.
This study in an overview of a model system for screening optimal protein purification conditions on a mixed-mode cation exchange resin using a statistical software–generated design of experiment (DOE) model with ChromLab Software’s Multivariable Scouting (MVS) function on the NGC Chromatography System.
An absorbent material using a novel proprietary structure overcomes the diffusional and flow limitations of packed bed chromatography purification systems and aims to address the capacity issues.
Biosimilars are considered to be low-cost substitutions for pricy, large-molecule biologics. However, biosimilars must meet the same quality, safety, and efficacy as their reference biologic. Manufacturing biosimilars requires a more complicated procedure than that of manufacturing small molecule generics. Companies manufacturing biosimilars are focused on creating a chemical structure that is as close as possible to that of the reference product. Failure rates and operational costs pose a challenge for those companies involved in manufacturing biosimilars compared to those manufacturing small molecule generics.
Small molecule generics are created using the same active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) and, therefore, are chemically identical to that of the originator medicine. The manufacturing process for small molecules comprises only one-fifth of the total in-process tests required to meet Good Manufacturing Practice compared to that of biologic medicines (50 vs. 250 in-process tests). In fact, the manufacturing process for a large molecule is so complex, it cannot be duplicated by two different manufacturers, as the cells used in biologic medicines are unique to the company manufacturing each biologic.
Manufacturing a biologic consists of genetically modifying a cell, which becomes the basis for a cell line used for the production of the necessary protein for the biologic medicine. The protein is then separated from the cells and purified. Biosimilars are created from small alterations to the manufacturing process which creates a molecule that is not identical but closely resembles the reference product. While the differences in the biosimilar molecule might be slight, these changes in the manufacturing process of a biosimilar can affect the efficacy and safety of a biosimilar compared to the reference biologic. Over the past decade, the manufacturing process for proteins has become more standardized and the required technology has become increasingly accessible, leading to reductions in biosimilars production costs. As a result, a greater number of companies have begun manufacturing biosimilars, while reference brand manufacturers are setting their sights on bolstering pipelines and manufacturing biobetters to maintain market share for their soon-to-be-off-patent reference products.