FDA Claims Sole Authority Over Naming Of US-Licensed Biologics
Executive Summary
Deferring to nonproprietary names established by US Pharmacopeia without exercising independent judgment ‘would be untenable,’ FDA says in citizen petition response to industry; agency offers statutory defense of decision to require distinguishable suffixes for all novel biologics and biosimilars.
You may also be interested in...
Biological Product Suffix Submissions Limited To 10 Candidates By US FDA
Increasing cap on number suffixs that sponsors can submit from three to 10 will increase review efficiency, agency says, but evaluation will still stop after finding first acceptable suffix as part of final guidance on distinguishable nonproprietary names for novel biological products and biosimilars.
Biologic Product Naming: US FDA Sticks With Suffixes ‘Devoid Of Meaning’
Final guidance adds new factors for biosimilar and innovative sponsors to consider in developing distinguishable suffixes for nonproprietary names but FDA is unswayed by calls for meaningful suffixes derived from license holder’s name; timing of retrospective application to previously approved products remains in question.
Biosimilar Name Debate Heats Up As USP Says Zarxio Doesn't Need Suffix
Determination that Zarxio meets monograph standards indicates product should carry same nonproprietary name as Neupogen, USP argues; FDA says monograph doesn't apply.