Interchangeability for Biologics is a Legal Distinction in the USA, Not a Clinical One

5Citations
Citations of this article
15Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Biologics are increasingly vital medicines that significantly reduce morbidity as well as mortality, yet access continues to be an issue even in apparently wealthy countries, such as the USA. While patient access is expected to improve with the introduction of biosimilars, misperceptions in a significant part based on terminology continue to make a sustained contribution by biosimilars difficult. Patients are and will continue to suffer needlessly if biosimilars continue to be impugned. Consequently, it is increasingly urgent that semantics are clarified, and in particular, the implication that interchangeable biologics are better biosimilars dismissed. This paper distinguishes between the real differences between biologics that matter clinically to patients and discusses the actual meaning of a US Food and Drug Administration designation of interchangeability for a biosimilar product. This will help highlight where there is need for further Food and Drug Administration education and which stakeholders likely need that education the most.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Park, J. P., Jung, B., Park, H. K., Shin, D., Jung, J. A., Ghil, J., … Woollett, G. R. (2022). Interchangeability for Biologics is a Legal Distinction in the USA, Not a Clinical One. BioDrugs, 36(4), 431–436. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40259-022-00538-6

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free