Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 18, 2026

07:25
In Vitro Methods for Comparing Target Binding and CDC Induction Between Therapeutic Antibodies: Applications in Biosimilarity Analysis
Published on: May 4, 2017
18.3K
Application of the FDA Biosimilar Extrapolation Framework to Make Off-Label Determinations
11 University of New England College of Pharmacy, Portland, Maine.
Journal of Managed Care & Specialty Pharmacy
|November 28, 2017
Summary
The FDA
Area of Science:
- Biosimilarity and extrapolation in pharmaceutical science.
- Regulatory science and policy for biologics.
- Clinical pharmacology and therapeutic applications.
Background:
- The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) employs an extrapolation framework enabling biosimilar licensure for unstudied indications by extending data from one population to another.
- Off-label use of biologics is common, with compendia and guidelines assessing evidence for appropriateness.
- Biosimilar evidence focuses on comparability to reference products, not re-establishing clinical benefit, necessitating a distinct approach for off-label determinations.
Purpose of the Study:
- To demonstrate the application of the FDA's biosimilar extrapolation framework for off-label policy decisions.
- To utilize two case studies, filgrastim and infliximab biosimilars, to illustrate this process.
Main Methods:
- The study outlines the FDA's extrapolation framework, assessing mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, immunogenicity, and toxicity for on-label versus off-label indications.
- Case studies of filgrastim-sndz and infliximab-dyyb examine their use for symptomatic anemia in myelodysplastic syndromes and immune-mediated colitis, respectively.
- Analytical, nonclinical, and clinical pharmacology data, alongside clinical studies demonstrating biosimilarity, were reviewed within the extrapolation framework.
Main Results:
- The mechanism of action for filgrastim and infliximab remains consistent between FDA-approved and off-label indications.
- Filgrastim-sndz and infliximab-dyyb exhibit high similarity in analytical and nonclinical characteristics to their reference products.
- No anticipated differences in safety and immunogenicity are expected across patient populations, supporting potential off-label use.
Conclusions:
- Biosimilar use for specific off-label indications can be scientifically justified.
- Compendia and guideline groups should formally assess biosimilar off-label indications using the FDA extrapolation framework to inform coverage policies.
Related Concept Videos
Drug Products: Biologics, Biosimilars and Interchangeables
288
Body:Biologics, derived from living sources such as humans, animals, or microorganisms, represent a significant category of pharmaceuticals. These complex molecules, developed through advanced biotechnological methods or purified from natural sources, include essential medical treatments like insulin and growth hormones. The complexity of biologics arises from their large molecular structures and the intricate processes required for their production, making them distinct from conventional...
288
Bioequivalence of Drugs: Drugs with Multiple Indications
168
The concept of therapeutic equivalence (TE) in drugs with multiple indications is complex. A generic drug may be therapeutically equivalent to a brand-name product for one specific indication, but this doesn't necessarily mean it's equivalent for all other indications. Evidence of TE in one patient group and bioequivalence shown in healthy volunteers can support—but not confirm—TE for other indications. However, definitive proof requires individual clinical studies for each...
168
Bioequivalence studies: Biowaivers
291
Body:In certain scenarios, in vitro dissolution tests can replace in vivo bioequivalence studies. This is particularly true when a drug product, though available in varying strengths, maintains proportional similarity in its active and inactive ingredients. In such cases, the need for in vivo bioequivalence studies for lower strength variants may be waived, provided dissolution tests and in vivo studies on the highest strength yield satisfactory results.Bioequivalence can be indicated through...
291
Bioequivalence: Overview
2.0K
Pharmaceutical equivalents, by definition, are drug products with the same active ingredient in the same quantities, encapsulated in identical dosage forms, and intended for the same administration routes. These pharmaceutical equivalents are deemed bioequivalent if the bioavailability of the active entity in the drug preparations is similar. Moreover, pharmaceutical equivalents demonstrating bioequivalence are also regarded as therapeutically equivalent. This means that when used as directed,...
2.0K
Impact of Pharmacokinetic–Pharmacodynamic Models: Regulatory Decisions
20
PK–PD modeling has significantly influenced FDA regulatory decisions, particularly drug approval, dosage optimization, and labeling. These models integrate pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) to predict drug behavior and effects, aiding in optimizing dosing regimens and enhancing the probability of clinical trial success.One notable example is Nesiritide (Natrecor®), a recombinant human brain natriuretic peptide for treating acute decompensated congestive heart failure...
20
Dosage Regimens: Partial Pharmacokinetic Parameters
194
It is not uncommon for complete drug pharmacokinetic profiles to remain elusive in pharmacokinetics. This necessitates certain educated assumptions by pharmacokineticists to determine appropriate dosage regimens without comprehensive pharmacokinetic data from animal or human studies. One prevalent assumption is setting the bioavailability factor, denoted as F, to 1 or 100%. This assumption caters to the scenario where a drug doesn't achieve full systemic absorption, resulting in the patient...
194

