Nanomedicines, since the approval of the first one in the 1950s, have been accompanied by expectations of higher efficiency and efficacy, compared to less complex drugs. The fulfilment of those expectations has been slower than anticipated, due to the high complexity of nanomedicine drugs combined with a lack of scientific understanding of nanomedicine interactions with biological systems. The unique properties of their size and their surface composition create difficulties in their physicochemical characterization, and as a consequence, difficulty in assessing the similarity of follow-on products (nanosimilars) to originator nanomedicines. During the 2018 European Federation for Pharmaceutical Sciences (EUFEPS) annual meeting "Crossing the barrier for future medicines" in Athens, there were several sessions on nanomedicines organised by the EUFEPS Nanomedicine Network. This review focuses on the session "Nanomedicines and nanosimilars: how to assess similar?", discussing the nature of nanomedicines, the regulatory aspects of the topic and the impact of practical use and handling of such medicinal products. Emphasis is put on the consequences their nanosize-related properties have on the establishment of their critical quality attributes and how this affects the demonstration of bioequivalence of nanosimilars to their originator products. The lack of an appropriate and harmonized regulatory evaluation procedure and the absence of corresponding education are also discussed, especially the uncertainty surrounding the practical use of nanosimilars, including the higher healthcare cost due to less than satisfactory number of safe and efficacious nanosimilars in the market.

Un-complexed polynuclear ferric oxyhydroxide cannot be administered safely or effectively to patients. When polynuclear iron cores are formed with carbohydrates of various structures, stable complexes with surface carbohydrates driven by multiple interacting sites and forces are formed. These complexes deliver iron in a usable form to the body while avoiding the serious adverse effects of un-complexed forms of iron, such as polynuclear ferric oxyhydroxide. The rate and extent of plasma clearance and tissue biodistribution is variable among the commercially available iron–carbohydrate complexes and is driven principally by the surface characteristics of the complexes which dictate macrophage opsonization. The surface chemistry differences between the iron–carbohydrate complexes results in significant differences in in vivo pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles as well as adverse event profiles, demonstrating that the entire iron–carbohydrate complex furnishes the pharmacologic action for these complex products. Currently available physicochemical characterization methods have limitations in biorelevant matrices resulting in challenges in defining critical quality attributes for surface characteristics for this class of complex nanomedicines.

Nanomedicines in the class of nonbiological complex drugs (NBCDs) are becoming increasingly available. Up to 23 nanomedicines have been approved, and approximately 50 are in clinical development. Meanwhile, the first nanosimilars have entered the market through the generic approval pathway, but clinical differences have been observed. Many healthcare professionals may be unaware of this issue and must be informed of these clinically relevant variances. This article provides a tool for rational decision making for the inclusion of nanomedicines into the hospital formulary, including defined criteria for evaluation of substitutability or interchangeability. The tool was generated by conducting a roundtable with an international panel of experts and follows the same thought process that was developed and published earlier for the selection of biologicals/biosimilars. In addition to the existing criteria for biosimilars, a set of seven criteria was identified that specifically apply to nanosimilars. These include (1) particle size and size distribution, (2) particle surface characteristics, (3) fraction of uncaptured bioactive moiety, (4) stability on storage, (5) bioactive moiety uptake and (6) distribution, and (7) stability for ready‐to‐use preparation. Pharmacists should utilize their pharmaceutical expertise to use the appropriate criteria to evaluate the comparability of the drug to decide on interchangeability or substitutability.

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently released a draft guidance for industry titled “Drug Products, Including Biological Products, that Contain Nanomaterials.” The FDA’s attention to the...

Intravenous (IV) iron nanoparticle preparations are widely used to treat iron deficiency. The mechanism of mononuclear phagocyte system-mediated clearance of IV iron nanoparticles is unknown. The early uptake and homeostasis of iron after injection of ferric carboxymaltose (FCM) in mice was studied. An increase in serum iron was observed at 2.5 h followed by a return to baseline by 24 h. An increase in circulating monocytes was observed, particularly Ly6C^hi and Ly6C^low. FCM was also associated with a time-dependent decrease in liver Kupffer cells (KCs) and increase in liver monocytes. The increase in liver monocytes suggests an influx of iron-rich blood monocytes, while some KCs underwent apoptosis. Adoptive transfer experiments demonstrated that following liver infiltration, blood monocytes differentiated to KCs. KCs were also critical for IV iron uptake and biodegradation. Indeed, anti-Colony Stimulating Factor 1 Receptor (CSF1R)-mediated depletion of KCs resulted in elevated serum iron levels and impaired iron uptake by the liver. Gene expression profiling indicated that C-C chemokine receptor type 5 (CCR5) might be involved in monocyte recruitment to the liver, confirmed by pharmaceutical inhibition of CCR5. Liver KCs play a pivotal role in the clearance and storage of IV iron and KCs appear to be supported by the expanded blood monocyte population.

Introduction This study investigates the drug selection and dispensing behaviour of hospital pharmacists of intravenous iron products including iron sucrose and iron sucrose similar, with special emphasis on substitution and interchangeability in France and Spain. Iron–carbohydrate complex drugs represent different available intravenous iron drugs and are part of the non-biological complex drug (NBCD) class, an expanding drug class with up to 30 brands available in intravenous pharmacotherapy and over 50 in clinical development. Follow-on versions of iron sucrose have appeared in some markets such as France and Spain, which were authorised by the generic approval pathway. However, differences in clinical efficacy and safety of iron sucrose similars compared with the reference originator drug Venofer have been observed, putting a question mark on their equivalence as assessed for authorisation and consequently their substitutability and interchangeability. Method 70 French and 70 Spanish hospital pharmacists were surveyed via an online questionnaire on their formulary selection and dispensing behaviour of intravenous iron medicines. Results There is little awareness about the characteristics of this class of drugs and the reported differences in safety and efficacy between iron sucrose and iron sucrose similars. In approximately 85% of cases the intravenous iron is chosen according to the hospital formulary. In 30% (France) and 34% (Spain) of cases an iron sucrose similar was dispensed because the formulary requires dispensing an alternative lower cost drug when available. In 26% (France) and 52% (Spain) of cases the physician is not informed on such a medication change using a similar product. Conclusions Evaluation of NBCD similars for substitution and interchange by hospital pharmacists is rarely based on scientific and clinical criteria but rather on cost aspects only, which does not ensure safe, efficacious and cost-effective use of such drugs.