Characterization and comparability of biosimilars: A filgrastim case of study and regulatory perspectives for Latin America

Background: Developing countries have an estimate of ten times more approved biosimilars than developed countries. This disparity demands the need of an objective regulation that incorporates health policies according to the technological and economical capabilities of each country. One of the challenges lies on the establishment of comparability principles based on a physicochemical and biological characterization that should determine the extent of additional non-clinical and clinical studies. This is particularly relevant for licensed biosimilars in developing countries, which have an extensive clinical experience since their approval as generics, in some cases more than a decade. To exemplify the current status of biosimilars in Mexico, a characterization exercise was conducted on licensed filgrastim biosimilars using pharmacopeial and extended characterization methodologies. Results: Most of the evaluated products complied with the pharmacopeial criteria and showed comparability in their Critical Quality Attributes (CQAs) towards the reference product. These results were expected in accordance with their equivalent performance during their licensing as generics. Accordingly, a rational approval and registration renewal scheme for biosimilars is proposed, that considers the proper identification of CQAs and its thoroughly evaluation using selected techniques. Conclusions: This approach provides support to diminish uncertainty of exhibiting different pharmacological profiles and narrows or even avoids the necessity of comparative clinical studies. Ultimately, this proposal is intended to improve the accessibility to high quality biosimilars in Latin America and other developing countries

Outcomes from elective colorectal cancer surgery during the SARS‐CoV‐2 pandemic

Aim This study aimed to describe the change in surgical practice and the impact of SARS-CoV-2 on mortality after surgical resection of colorectal cancer during the initial phases of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Method This was an international cohort study of patients undergoing elective resection of colon or rectal cancer without preoperative suspicion of SARS-CoV-2. Centres entered data from their first recorded case of COVID-19 until 19 April 2020. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included anastomotic leak, postoperative SARS-CoV-2 and a comparison with prepandemic European Society of Coloproctology cohort data. Results From 2073 patients in 40 countries, 1.3% (27/2073) had a defunctioning stoma and 3.0% (63/2073) had an end stoma instead of an anastomosis only. Thirty-day mortality was 1.8% (38/2073), the incidence of postoperative SARS-CoV-2 was 3.8% (78/2073) and the anastomotic leak rate was 4.9% (86/1738). Mortality was lowest in patients without a leak or SARS-CoV-2 (14/1601, 0.9%) and highest in patients with both a leak and SARS-CoV-2 (5/13, 38.5%). Mortality was independently associated with anastomotic leak (adjusted odds ratio 6.01, 95% confidence interval 2.58–14.06), postoperative SARS-CoV-2 (16.90, 7.86–36.38), male sex (2.46, 1.01–5.93), age >70 years (2.87, 1.32–6.20) and advanced cancer stage (3.43, 1.16–10.21). Compared with prepandemic data, there were fewer anastomotic leaks (4.9% versus 7.7%) and an overall shorter length of stay (6 versus 7 days) but higher mortality (1.7% versus 1.1%). Conclusion Surgeons need to further mitigate against both SARS-CoV-2 and anastomotic leak when offering surgery during current and future COVID-19 waves based on patient, operative and organizational risks