REFLECTIONS AND PERSPECTIVES ON BIOSIMILARS IN BRAZIL

  • RENATA LUZES ARAUJO Social Medicine Institute (Instituto de Medicina Social), Rio de Janeiro State University (Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro–UERJ), Brazil
  • GABRIELA BITTENCOURT GONZALEZ MOSEGUI Community Health Institute (Instituto de Saude da Comunidade), Fluminense Federal University (Universidade Federal Fluminense UFF), Brazil https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5954-684X
  • CID MANSO D. E. MELLO VIANNA Social Medicine Institute (Instituto de Medicina Social), Rio de Janeiro State University (Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro–UERJ), Brazil https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0252-1144
  • FERNANDO ANTONANZAS VILLAR Department of Economy and Company, Economy Faculty, University of La Rioja, Logrono, La Rioja, Spain https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6122-9130
  • THAIS PEREIRA CATAO Department of Economy and Company, Economy Faculty, University of La Rioja, Logrono, La Rioja, Spain https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2751-076X

Abstract

Objective: Biological agents are among the medicines with the highest revenue in the world market. Biosimilars are copies of biological products introduced into the market to offer clinical efficacy like the originator or reference product at lower prices. This study aimed to verify the characteristics and price differences between biological medicines registered and marketed in Brazil until the end of 2019.


Methods: All records were collected by November 2019 on the website of the National Health Surveillance Agency (Anvisa). The list of the Chamber of Regulation of the Medicines Market (CMED) consulted for the price analysis, has an economic classificatory criterion with eight ranges. Categorization, according to the date/period of authorization for marketing, was also made.


Results: At Anvisa site, there are 144 drugs present in 277 products distributed in three regulatory categories: new, biological, and similar. Approximately 73% of drugs have been approved in the past five years. Three classes represent 77.9% of all drugs-antineoplastics and immunomodulatory agents (38.6%), blood and blood organ forming (20.7%), and alimentary tract and metabolism (18.6%). Of the 178 products listed in the CMED, 26 (14.6%) have prices above 10,000 reais.


Conclusion: The prices of original products, for most of the inputs, are lower than those of biosimilars, reversing the international logic.

Keywords: Biological products, Drug price, Access to essential medicines, Health technologies

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

GABRIELA BITTENCOURT GONZALEZ MOSEGUI, Community Health Institute (Instituto de Saude da Comunidade), Fluminense Federal University (Universidade Federal Fluminense UFF), Brazil

Health and Society Department

Associate Professor

References

Grampp G, Ramanan S. Managing unexpected events in the manufacturing of biologic medicines. BioDrugs 2013;27:305–16.
2. Buske C, Ogura M, Kwon HC, Yoon SW. An introduction to biosimilar cancer therapeutics: definitions, the rationale for the development and regulatory requirements. Futur Oncol 2017;13:5–16.
3. Tanaka RL, Amorim MCS. The market and the possibilities of the biopharmaceutical industry in Brazil. Rev Fac Ciencias Med Sorocaba 2014;16:86–92.
4. National Health Surveillance Agency (Anvisa). Biological Medicines for the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis. BRATS-Boletim Brasileiro de Avaliaçao de Tecnologias em Saude. Brasilia; 2012.
5. Martell RE, Sermer D, Getz K KK. Oncology drug development and approval of systemic anticancer therapy by the U. S. Food and drug administration. Oncologist 2013;18:104–11.
6. Garcia R, Araujo DV. The regulation of biosimilars in Latin America. Curr Rheumatol Rep 2016;18:1–8.
7. Renganathan R, Vijayabanu C, Srinivasakumar V, Vijay Anand V. Pharmaceutical pricing policy and control: Indian perspective. Asian J Pharm Clin Res 2016;9:305–8.
8. Gomes EBP, Rosseto R, Pinheiro L, Hasenclever L, Paranhos J. Development of biosimilars in Brazil. Fronteiras 2016;5:31–42.
9. Casey D. Key strategic factors for stakeholders in the current global biosimilar market. Drug Discovery Today 2016;21:208–11.
10. Bernal Camargo DR, Gaitan Bohorquez JC, Leon Robayo EI. Biosimilar medicines in colombia: an approach from the informed consumption. Rev Ciencias Salud 2018;16:311–39.
11. Interfarma. Pharmaceutical research industry association understanding biological medicines. Interfarma: Pharmaceutical Research Industry Association. Sao Paulo; 2012.
12. Ruiz R, Strasser Weippl K, Touya D, Herrero Vincent C, Hernandez Blanquisett A, St Louis J, et al. Improving access to high-cost cancer drugs in Latin America: Much to be done. Cancer 2017;123:1313–23.
13. Belloni A, Morgan D, Paris V. Pharmaceutical expenditure and policies: past trends and future challenges, OECD Health Working Papers. OECD Publishing; 2016.
14. Farhat F, Torres A, Park W, de Lima Lopes G, Mudad R, Ikpeazu C, et al. The concept of biosimilars: from characterization to evolution-a narrative review. Oncologist, 2018;23:346–52.
15. Agencia Nacional de Vigilância Sanitaria (Anvisa). Pharmaceutical Market Statistical Yearbook; 2018.
16. Berkowitz SA, Engen JR, Mazzeo JR, Jones GB. Analytical tools for characterizing biopharmaceuticals and the implications for biosimilars. Nat Rev Drug Discovery 2012;11:527–40.
17. National Health Surveillance Agency (ANVISA). Rdc n °55/2010. Brasil: Publicada no DOU n °241, de 17 de dezembro de 2010; 2010. p. 26.
18. Interfarma. Pharmaceutical Research Industry Association. Biological and biosimilar medicines and their regulatory standards. Primer for patients. 1a. São Paulo: Interfarma. Pharmaceutical Research Industry Association; 2013. p. 1–20.
19. National Health Surveillance Agency (Anvisa). Consultation of the medication registry. Available from: https://consultas. anvisa.gov.br/#/medicamentos/ [Last accessed on 10 Mar 2020]
20. World Health Organization (WHO) Collaborating Centre for Drug Statistics. ATC/DDD Index; 2020. Available from: https://www.whocc.no/atc_ddd_index/?code=L04AB02 [Last accessed on 28 Dec 2019]
21. Medicine Market Regulation Chamber (CMED). Maximum Prices of Medicines by Active Principle. Vol. 796. Brasilia; 2019.
22. National Health Surveillance Agency (Anvisa). Regularizacao de Produtos-Medicamentos. Registro de Medicamentos Similares; 2020. Available from: http://portal.anvisa.gov.br/registros-e-autorizacoes/medicamentos/produtos/medicamentos-similares/registro [Last accessed on 05 Feb 2020]
23. Gava CM, Bermudez JAZ, Pepe VLE. New drugs registered in Brazil: Can they be considered as a therapeutic advance? Cience Saude Coletiva 2010;15(Suppl 3):3403–12.
24. MarketResearch.com. The Growing Pharmaceuticals Market: Expert Forecasts and Analysis. Rockville MD (US); 2019. Available from: https://blog.marketresearch.com/the-growing-pharma-ceuticals-market-expert-forecasts-and-analysis
25. National Administration of Medicines, Food and Medical Technology (ANMAT); Disposal n °7729/2011. Argentina; 2011. [Last accessed on 18 Mar 2019]
26. Ministerio Salud I. Technical standard 170 of sanitary registration of biotechnological products derived from recombinant techniques; 2014. p. 1–27.
27. Colombia M de Sy PS. Decree n °1782 de 2014. Colombia; 2014. p. 713–24.
28. Gaviria A, González CPV, Munoz CG, Morales AA. The biotech drug regulation debate: colombia in the international context. Rev Panam Salud Publica/Pan Am J Public Heal 2016;40:40–7.
29. Lietzan E. Carta Al Editor: How Colombia’s biosimilar regulation departs from international norms. Rev Panam Salud Publica; 2017. p. 41.
30. Aggarwal SR. What’s fueling the biotech engine-2012 to 2013. Nat Biotechnol 2014;32:32–9.
31. Harston A. How the U. S. compares to europe on biosimilar approvals and products in the pipeline. Rothwell Figg; 2019. Available from: https://www.biosimilarsip.com/2019/05/ 07/how-the-u-s-compares-to-europe-on-biosimilar-approvals-and-products-in-the-pipeline-4/ [Last accessed on 05 Mar 2019]
32. Beaver JA, Howie LJ, Pelosof L, Kim T, Liu J, Keegan P, et al. A 25 Y experience of us food and drug administration accelerated approval of malignant hematology and oncology drugs and biologics a review. JAMA Oncol 2018;4:849–56.
33. McCamish M, Woollett G. Worldwide experience with biosimilar development. MAbs 2011;3:212–20.
34. Cornes P. The economic pressures for biosimilar drug use in cancer medicine. 2012;7Suppl 1:S57-67.
35. Experience I, Potential F. Biosimilar cost savings in the United States initial experience and future potential short abstract roadmap the cost savings potential of biosimilars. Rand Heal Q 2019;7:3–20.
36. Castaneda Hernandez G, Szekanecz Z, Mysler E, Azevedo VF, Guzman R, Gutierrez M, et al. Biopharmaceuticals for rheumatic diseases in Latin America, Europe, Russia, and India: Innovators, biosimilars, and intended copies. Jt Bone Spine 2014;81:471–7.
37. Rovira J, Espin J, Garcia L, Labry AO De. The impact of biosimilars’ entry in the EU market; 2011.
38. BOE Num 98. Real-Decreto ley 16/2012, de 20 de abril, of urgent measures to guarantee the sustainability of the National Health System and improve the quality and safety of its services. Espanha: BOE Num 98; 2012.
39. Shaik R, Muragundi PM. Evaluation of price disparity among generic medicines in India. Asian J Pharm Clin Res 2018;11:466-8.
Statistics
87 Views | 100 Downloads
Citatons
How to Cite
ARAUJO, R. L., G. B. G. MOSEGUI, C. M. D. E. M. VIANNA, F. A. VILLAR, and T. P. CATAO. “REFLECTIONS AND PERSPECTIVES ON BIOSIMILARS IN BRAZIL”. International Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Vol. 12, no. 7, May 2020, pp. 26-31, doi:10.22159/ijpps.2020v12i7.37903.
Section
Original Article(s)