Biosimilars in Ophthalmology
All content on Eyewiki is protected by copyright law and the Terms of Service. This content may not be reproduced, copied, or put into any artificial intelligence program, including large language and generative AI models, without permission from the Academy.
Introduction
- Intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) therapy has greatly improved the treatment of conditions like neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD), diabetic macular edema (DME), and diabetic retinopathy (DR).
- Despite this progress, the need for repeated injections, high drug costs, and the burden of long-term treatment create significant barriers to access and adherence.
- Biosimilars are highly similar biologic products to approved references, with no meaningful differences in safety or efficacy. Understanding biosimilars requires differentiating them from generics, originator biologics, and compounded drugs. The key terms and their practical relevance are listed in Table 1.
- In ophthalmology, anti-VEGF biosimilars offer lower-cost alternatives to ranibizumab and aflibercept, potentially reducing treatment costs, improving access, and enhancing market competition.
- The biosimilar landscape is rapidly evolving. Ranibizumab biosimilars were the first widely adopted, and in 2024, several aflibercept biosimilars, including interchangeable options, received approval.
Table 1: Key terms in ophthalmic biosimilars
| Term | Meaning | Practical relevance |
| Biologic | A complex therapeutic molecule produced in living systems | Includes ranibizumab, aflibercept, faricimab, and bevacizumab |
| Reference product/originator biologic | The original biologic product approved on the basis of full safety and efficacy data | Examples: Lucentis and Eylea |
| Biosimilar | A biologic highly similar to a reference product, with no clinically meaningful difference in safety, purity, and potency | May be approved through an abbreviated pathway |
| Generic drug | Chemically identical copy of a small-molecule drug | Not equivalent to a biosimilar because biologics are large and complex |
| Interchangeable biosimilar | A biosimilar expected to produce the same clinical result as the reference product and eligible for substitution under applicable pharmacy laws | Important for prescribing, substitution, and payer policies |
| Indication extrapolation | Approval for indications of the reference product even if the biosimilar was not directly studied in every indication | Reduces development cost and accelerates access |
| Immunogenicity | Ability of a drug to trigger anti-drug antibodies or immune reactions | Important for intraocular inflammation and long-term safety |
| Switching | Changing from reference biologic to biosimilar, biosimilar to reference product, or one biosimilar to another | Requires monitoring and patient counseling |
| Compounded bevacizumab | Off-label aliquoted bevacizumab prepared for intravitreal use by compounding pharmacies | Distinct from an FDA-approved ophthalmic biosimilar |
Regulatory Approval Pathway
- Biosimilar approval differs from approval of an originator biologic. The originator biologic must establish safety and efficacy de novo. A biosimilar, however, must demonstrate that it is highly similar to the reference product and has no clinically meaningful differences in safety, purity, and potency.[1]
- The biosimilar development pathway emphasizes analytical comparability, functional assays, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, immunogenicity, and comparative clinical data. If biosimilarity is established, regulatory agencies may permit indication extrapolation to other approved indications of the reference product if scientifically justified.( Figure 1)
Neovascular Age Related Macular Degeneration (nAMD) and Diabetic Macular Edema (DME) are leading causes of severe vision loss in the general population. The prevalence of these conditions is expected to increase as the number of people with diabetes rises and the general population ages. A key player in both conditions is Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (VEGF), a signal protein that promotes the growth of abnormal blood vessels and increases vascular permeability (Figure 2).[2][3][4] Anti-VEGF therapies such as ranibizumab (RZB) (Lucentis), aflibercept (Eylea), and faricimab-svoa (Vabysmo) have been developed to inhibit VEGF's actions, thereby slowing the progression of nAMD and DME.[5][6]
Despite the efficacy of these treatments, the high cost of ranibizumab, aflibercept, and faricimab-svoa is a significant disadvantage. Biosimilars are now being offered as a potentially more affordable alternative treatment for nAMD and DME. The safety and efficacy of few biosimilars have been proved in evidence-based literature.[7][8] Their lower cost may present advantages to patients, physicians, payers, and health care systems. With better education on biosimilars, these treatments have the potential to reduce costs, increase treatment adherence, and improve patient outcomes.[9]
Another Anti-VEGF therapy, bevacizumab (Avastin), is an alternative option available via compounding pharmacies. Initially approved to treat different types of cancer, Avastin has found significant off-label use in the treatment of nAMD and DME, given its low cost. The FDA permits this off-label use due to numerous studies demonstrating Avastin's efficacy. There have been instances of cluster endophthalmitis after use of intravitreal Avastin, which were mostly related to spurious drug or noncompliance to standard sterile compounding procedures.[10][11] However, the development of biosimilars to bevacizumab raises a potential legal issue that might result in the prohibition of Avastin's off-label use. This scenario could, in turn, lead to an increase in overall patient costs.[12]
This article aims to summarize the current literature about biosimilars and their safety, efficacy, and quality.
Biosimilars in Ophthalmology
An Overview
As the patents for original biologics used to treat nAMD and DME approach expiration, numerous companies are striving to replicate these biologics. Biosimilars are drugs that are similar to reference drugs and mimic their effects, but they do not have the same identical active ingredients.[14] Unlike small molecule drugs, biologics and their biosimilars are large, complex molecules (Figure 3).[13] Furthermore, the "formula" for developing a biosimilar is not provided by the originator biologics. Consequently, companies often have limited information about the original biologic and must rely on techniques such as reverse engineering to develop biosimilars.[15]
Companies’ motivation to develop biosimilars is multifaceted. The development of original biologics is a lengthy and costly process, typically spanning 10-15 years and costing an average of 1.2-2.5 billion dollars. In contrast, biosimilars can be manufactured within 8-10 years at approximately a tenth of the cost.[16][17] A significant portion of the cost and time savings in developing biosimilars is due to their unique approval process, which requires fewer clinical trials and places a greater emphasis on demonstrating analytical bioequivalence to prove similarity to the reference biologic.[15]
A critical stage in the development of biosimilars involves the selection of a reference product and the subsequent development and cultivation of a cell line.
- This process begins with the identification of the relevant gene that encodes the target protein of the reference product , which is then cloned into a vector.
- The vector is subsequently transfected into host cells, typically Chinese hamster ovary cells. These transfected cells are then selected for stable expression of the protein of interest.
- Finally, the cells are amplified to create a cell bank, which serves as the foundation for biosimilar production.[19]
The development of biosimilars is complex and differs from that of generic drugs, necessitating a clear differentiation and understanding of their approval process. While generic drugs require matching the chemical formula and synthesis, biosimilars require live cells. Additionally, due to the fact that biosimilars are not exact copies in terms of formulation, there is a need for increased attention to assessing stability and immunogenicity.[15] Only minor differences in clinically inactive components, known as excipients, are allowed in biosimilars.[20]
The United States (US) established safety and bioequivalence standards for biosimilars in 2009. For approval, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requires evidence that there are “no clinically meaningful differences in safety, purity, and potency between the biosimilar and reference product”.[21] This is achieved via a stepwise approach, which differs from the drug approval pathway for the reference biologic, as biosimilar approval relies more heavily on analytical data performed to establish similarity in physicochemical properties (Figure 3).[9][18] The efficacy of a biosimilar product is assessed based on pre-determined equivalence margins using selected clinical endpoints.[9] Following assessment by regulatory authorities such as the FDA, if no clinically meaningful differences are found, the biosimilar is automatically approved for all indications of the reference drug, even if the biosimilar was not directly studied in clinical trials. This principle, referred to as “indication extrapolation,” reduces the cost of manufacturing biosimilars.[21]
A Closer Look
This section offers an in-depth review of biosimilars, both approved and in development, for the treatment of nAMD and DME. The reference drugs currently used for these conditions are RBZ (Lucentis), and aflibercept (Eylea). Due to the nature of the biosimilar approval process, most clinical trials primarily focus on evaluating safety, efficacy, pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), and immunogenicity in patients with nAMD. Additionally, we will discuss other biosimilars that are in the advanced stages of clinical trials.
FDA (Food and Drug Administration, USA) approved
The most clinically relevant ophthalmic biosimilars are anti-VEGF agents used for retinal disease. Ranibizumab biosimilars were the first ophthalmic anti-VEGF biosimilars to gain widespread regulatory approval. Aflibercept biosimilars expanded rapidly in 2024.(Table 2)
Table 2. FDA-approved ophthalmic anti-VEGF biosimilars
| Reference drug | Biosimilar | Nonproprietary name | Key FDA status |
| Ranibizumab / Lucentis | Byooviz | ranibizumab-nuna | FDA-approved ranibizumab biosimilar |
| Ranibizumab / Lucentis | Cimerli | ranibizumab-eqrn | FDA-approved; interchangeable |
| Aflibercept / Eylea | Yesafili | aflibercept-jbvf | FDA-approved; interchangeable |
| Aflibercept / Eylea | Opuviz | aflibercept-yszy | FDA-approved; interchangeable |
| Aflibercept / Eylea | Ahzantive | aflibercept-mrbb | FDA-approved aflibercept biosimilar |
| Aflibercept / Eylea | Enzeevu | aflibercept-abzv | FDA-approved aflibercept biosimilar |
| Aflibercept / Eylea | Pavblu | aflibercept-ayyh | FDA-approved aflibercept biosimilar |
Ranibizumab Biosimilars
- The first FDA-approved biosimilar to RBZ is Byooviz (SB-11), which received approval in September 2021.[22]
- Ranibizumab biosimilars were the first major ophthalmic anti-VEGF biosimilars introduced for retinal disease. Their clinical development has largely focused on nAMD, with regulatory approval for additional indications based on biosimilarity, totality of evidence, and indication extrapolation.
Table 3. Important ranibizumab biosimilars
| Biosimilar | Reference product | Region/status | Key evidence or issue |
| Byooviz / SB11 | Ranibizumab | FDA-approved | Phase 3 data showed comparable visual and anatomic outcomes to reference ranibizumab in nAMD |
| Cimerli / FYB201 | Ranibizumab | FDA-approved; interchangeable | COLUMBUS-AMD trial supported comparable efficacy and safety |
| Razumab | Ranibizumab | Approved in India | First ranibizumab biosimilar; early post-marketing inflammation concerns led to further safety evaluation |
| LUBT010 | Ranibizumab | India/development | Phase 3 Indian data suggested comparable efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity |
| CKD-701 | Ranibizumab | Development/region-specific | Phase 3 trial reported comparable outcomes in nAMD |
| XSB-001 / Xlucane | Ranibizumab | Development/region-specific | Phase 3 nAMD data reported biosimilarity to reference ranibizumab |
| Rimmyrah | Ranibizumab | Region-specific/development | 2026 comparative data reported similar safety and efficacy in DME |
Byooviz / SB11
Byooviz (ranibizumab-nuna, SB11) is a ranibizumab biosimilar developed for intravitreal use. Comparative phase 3 data in patients with nAMD showed that SB11 met predefined equivalence endpoints for visual acuity and central retinal thickness, with comparable safety, pharmacokinetic, and immunogenicity profiles.
Cimerli / FYB201
Cimerli (ranibizumab-eqrn, FYB201) is an FDA-approved interchangeable ranibizumab biosimilar. The COLUMBUS-AMD study evaluated FYB201 against reference ranibizumab in nAMD and showed comparable improvement in best-corrected visual acuity and anatomic outcomes, without clinically meaningful safety differences.[5]
Razumab
Razumab was approved in India as a ranibizumab biosimilar and has been used in retinal disease. Early reports of ocular inflammation led to safety advisories and further evaluation. Subsequent studies have reported comparable efficacy to reference ranibizumab in selected retinal indications, but its history highlights the importance of pharmacovigilance, manufacturing consistency, and post-marketing safety reporting.
Aflibercept Biosimilars: Major 2024 Expansion
- Aflibercept biosimilars represent one of the most important recent developments in ophthalmic biosimilars. In 2024, multiple biosimilars referencing Eylea entered the regulatory landscape, including interchangeable products. [6][23][24]
- This has important implications for retinal practice, payer policy, cost, switching, and access.
Table 4. Aflibercept biosimilars
| Biosimilar | Nonproprietary name | Developer/company | FDA milestone |
| Yesafili | aflibercept-jbvf | Biocon Biologics | FDA-approved May 2024; interchangeable |
| Opuviz | aflibercept-yszy | Samsung Bioepis / Biogen | FDA-approved May 2024; interchangeable |
| Ahzantive | aflibercept-mrbb | Formycon / Klinge Biopharma | FDA-approved June 2024 |
| Enzeevu | aflibercept-abzv | Sandoz | FDA-approved August 2024 |
| Pavblu | aflibercept-ayyh | Amgen | FDA-approved August 2024 |
- Phase 3 studies of aflibercept biosimilars have generally used nAMD as the comparative clinical model, assessing change in best-corrected visual acuity, central subfield thickness, safety, pharmacokinetics, and immunogenicity. [25]
- Recent meta-analyses have reported no meaningful differences in visual, anatomic, safety, or immunogenicity outcomes between aflibercept biosimilars and reference aflibercept in nAMD, though longer-term real-world pharmacovigilance remains important.[26][27]
Bevacizumab and Bevacizumab Biosimilars
- Bevacizumab is widely used off-label as an intravitreal anti-VEGF agent because of its low cost and extensive clinical experience. Unlike ophthalmic ranibizumab and aflibercept biosimilars, bevacizumab is not originally approved as an ophthalmic intravitreal product; it is repackaged into intravitreal aliquots by compounding pharmacies.[28][29]
- This distinction is clinically important. Compounded bevacizumab involves considerations related to sterility, aliquoting, storage, cold-chain handling, and compounding quality.
- Reports of cluster endophthalmitis have generally been linked to contamination, spurious supply, or breaches in sterile compounding practices rather than the anti-VEGF mechanism itself.[30]
- Bevacizumab biosimilars are approved for oncology indications in many regions, but their role in ophthalmology is more complex because intravitreal bevacizumab itself is an off-label, compounded use. Any discussion of bevacizumab biosimilars in retina practice should distinguish systemic oncology approval from off-label intravitreal use.[31][7](Table 5)
Table 5. Bevacizumab versus ophthalmic biosimilars
| Product category | Ophthalmic use | Key issue |
| Originator bevacizumab / Avastin | Off-label intravitreal use | Low cost; requires sterile compounding |
| Bevacizumab biosimilars | Approved mainly for systemic oncology indications | Intravitreal use is not equivalent to ophthalmic approval |
| Ranibizumab biosimilars | Approved for ophthalmic intravitreal retinal indications | Directly regulated as ophthalmic products |
| Aflibercept biosimilars | Approved for ophthalmic intravitreal retinal indications | Rapidly expanding market since 2024 |
Approved Outside the United States
- Several biosimilars have been approved or used outside the United States before or alongside FDA approvals. (Table 6)
- Regional experience is important because manufacturing standards, post-marketing surveillance systems, payer frameworks, and regulatory requirements may differ.
Table 6. Examples of ophthalmic biosimilars approved or used outside the United States
| Product | Reference drug | Region/example | Key point |
| Razumab | Ranibizumab | India | Early real-world use; inflammation reports prompted safety review |
| LUBT010 | Ranibizumab | India | Phase 3 Indian data suggest therapeutic equivalence |
| Ongavia | Ranibizumab | Europe/UK context | Included in cost-effectiveness discussions |
| Yesafili | Aflibercept | Multiple regions | Approved in the US as interchangeable; also approved in other jurisdictions |
| Additional aflibercept biosimilars | Aflibercept | EU/other markets | Growing international pipeline and approvals |
Biosimilars in Development
- The development pipeline continues to expand as patents expire and anti-VEGF demand rises globally. Aflibercept biosimilars have progressed rapidly, while future biosimilars may target additional anti-VEGF agents. [27][32]
- Products in development should be categorized carefully by current phase and regulatory region.(Table 7)
Table 7. Future biosimilar development themes
| Development area | Why it matters |
| Additional aflibercept biosimilars | Increased competition and payer influence |
| Biosimilars to newer biologics | Faricimab and other newer agents may become future targets after exclusivity periods |
| Prefilled syringe development | May improve workflow, reduce waste, and reduce compounding/handling errors |
| Switching and multiple-switch studies | Important as more biosimilars enter practice |
| Real-world registries | Needed for rare safety events and long-term outcomes |
| Global access studies | Important for low- and middle-income settings |
| Cost-effectiveness modeling | Helps guide payer and policy decisions |
Switching Between Reference Products and Biosimilars
- Switching may occur for cost, payer policy, availability, patient preference, or clinical reasons. The available evidence supports comparable outcomes for approved biosimilars in studied settings, but real-world monitoring is important, especially after nonmedical switching or repeated switching.[33] Common switching scenarios are listed in Table 8.
- After switching, patients should be monitored using the same disease-specific parameters used for any anti-VEGF therapy: best-corrected visual acuity, OCT fluid and central retinal thickness, injection interval, intraocular inflammation, intraocular pressure, and adverse events. A clear baseline before switching helps distinguish natural disease fluctuation from a true change in treatment response.
Table 8. Switching scenarios in ophthalmology
| Switching scenario | Practical consideration |
| Reference biologic to biosimilar | Most common cost-driven switch |
| Biosimilar to reference biologic | May occur due to intolerance, payer change, or clinician preference |
| Biosimilar to biosimilar | Increasingly possible as more products enter market |
| Nonmedical switching | Driven by payer/formulary; requires communication and documentation |
| Multiple switching | Needs more real-world safety and immunogenicity data |
| Switching in unstable disease | Should be individualized and monitored closely |
Cost and Access
- Cost is a major driver of biosimilar adoption, but exact drug prices, payer policies, average sales prices, wholesale acquisition costs, rebates, and reimbursement rules change over time.
- Therefore, cost discussions should be dated and interpreted cautiously.[34](Table 9)
Table 9. Factors influencing real-world cost
| Cost factor | Why it matters |
| Wholesale acquisition cost | Manufacturer list price varies by product |
| Average sales price | Updated periodically and affects reimbursement |
| Payer contracts/rebates | May not be transparent |
| Patient copay | Varies by insurance and jurisdiction |
| Injection frequency | Determines annual treatment cost |
| Drug wastage | Vial/syringe format and dose preparation matter |
| Administration cost | Injection visit cost may exceed drug savings in some settings |
| Monitoring burden | OCT and clinic visit frequency influence total cost |
| Legal/patent barriers | May delay launch despite approval |
| Availability | Approved product may not be immediately marketed |
Safety and Immunogenicity
- Safety evaluation of ophthalmic biosimilars must include both drug-related and injection-related risks.
- Because anti-VEGF biosimilars are complex biologics administered repeatedly into the eye, immunogenicity and intraocular inflammation are important considerations.[35](Table 9)
Table 9. Safety and immunogenicity considerations
| Safety issue |
| Intraocular inflammation |
| Endophthalmitis |
| Retinal vasculitis or vascular occlusion |
| Anti-drug antibodies |
| Intraocular pressure elevation |
| Systemic vascular events |
| Compounding contamination |
| Storage and cold-chain errors |
| Lot-specific safety signals |
Limitations of Current Evidence
- Most biosimilar trials are designed to demonstrate equivalence or comparability rather than superiority.
- Many pivotal trials are performed in nAMD, while other retinal indications may be approved through indication extrapolation.
- Trial follow-up duration, sample size, and exclusion criteria may limit the ability to detect rare inflammatory or immunogenic events.
- Real-world studies and registries are therefore important for long-term safety, switching outcomes, payer-driven substitution, multiple switching, and rare adverse events.
Future Directions
- The ophthalmic biosimilar field is expected to expand as more patents expire, more products enter the market, and real-world data mature.
- Future work should focus on comparative effectiveness, long-term safety, immunogenicity, multiple switching, cost-effectiveness, patient acceptance, and equitable access.
Key Points
- Biosimilars are highly similar biologic products with no clinically meaningful differences from their reference products in safety, purity, and potency.
- Anti-VEGF biosimilars are most relevant in ophthalmology for retinal diseases requiring repeated intravitreal injections.
- Ranibizumab biosimilars were the first major ophthalmic anti-VEGF biosimilars.
- Aflibercept biosimilars expanded rapidly in 2024, including FDA-approved interchangeable products.
- Interchangeability, indication extrapolation, switching, immunogenicity, and post-marketing surveillance are central concepts for clinicians.
- Compounded intravitreal bevacizumab is distinct from an FDA-approved ophthalmic biosimilar.
- Biosimilars may improve affordability and access, but real-world safety, payer policy, and patient counseling remain important.
References
- ↑ Bressler NM, Kaiser PK, Do DV, Nguyen QD, Park KH, Woo SJ, Sagong M, Bradvica M, Kim MY, Kim S, Sadda SR. Biosimilars of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor for ophthalmic diseases: A review. Surv Ophthalmol. 2024 Jul-Aug;69(4):521-538. doi: 10.1016/j.survophthal.2024.03.009. Epub 2024 Mar 21. PMID: 38521423.
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 Chauhan MZ, Rather PA, Samarah SM, Elhusseiny AM, Sallam AB. Current and Novel Therapeutic Approaches for Treatment of Diabetic Macular Edema. Cells. 2022 Jun 17;11(12):1950
- ↑ Schmidt-Erfurth U, Garcia-Arumi J, Bandello F, et al. Guidelines for the Management of Diabetic Macular Edema by the European Society of Retina Specialists (EURETINA). Ophthalmologica. 2017;237(4):185-222. doi:10.1159/000458539
- ↑ The Eye Diseases Prevalence Research Group*. Prevalence of Age-Related Macular Degeneration in the United States. Arch Ophthalmol. 2004;122(4):564-572. doi:10.1001/archopht.122.4.564
- ↑ Nguyen QD, Brown DM, Marcus DM, et al. Ranibizumab for Diabetic Macular Edema: Results from 2 Phase III Randomized Trials: RISE and RIDE. Ophthalmology. 2012;119(4):789-801. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.12.039
- ↑ Elhusseiny AM, Chauhan MZ, Rather PA, Samarah SM, Sallam AB. Current and Novel Therapeutic Approaches for Treatment of Diabetic Macular Edema. Cells. 2022;11(12):1950. doi:10.3390/cells11121950
- ↑ Sharma S, Gupta V, Maiti A, et al. Safety and efficacy of Razumab™ (world's first biosimilar ranibizumab) in wet age-related macular degeneration: a post-marketing, prospective ASSET study. Int J Retina Vitreous. 2021;7(1):24. Published 2021 Mar 24. doi:10.1186/s40942-021-00293-w
- ↑ Hatamnejad A, Dadak R, Orr S, Wykoff C, Choudhry N. Systematic review of efficacy and meta-analysis of safety of ranibizumab biosimilars relative to reference ranibizumab anti-VEGF therapy for nAMD treatment. BMJ Open Ophthalmol. 2023;8(1):e001205. doi:10.1136/bmjophth-2022-001205
- ↑ 9.0 9.1 9.2 Kaiser PK, Schmitz-Valckenberg MS, Holz FG. ANTI–VASCULAR ENDOTHELIAL GROWTH FACTOR BIOSIMILARS IN OPHTHALMOLOGY. Retina. 2022;42(12):[[1]]. doi:10.1097/IAE.0000000000003626
- ↑ Gonzalez S, Rosenfeld PJ, Stewart MW, Brown J, Murphy SP. Avastin doesn't blind people, people blind people. Am J Ophthalmol. 2012;153(2):196-203.e1. doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2011.11.023
- ↑ Kumar A, Tripathy K, Chawla R. Intraocular use of bevacizumab in India: An issue resolved?. Natl Med J India. 2017;30(6):345-347. doi:10.4103/0970-258X.239079
- ↑ Zhang C, Friedman S, Mruthyunjaya P, Parikh R. The Biosimilar Paradox: How Anti-VEGF Biosimilars will Increase Patient and Overall Healthcare Costs. Ophthalmology. 2023;0(0). doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2023.04.019
- ↑ 13.0 13.1 Ishii-Watabe A, Kuwabara T. Biosimilarity assessment of biosimilar therapeutic monoclonal antibodies. Drug Metab Pharmacokinet. 2019;34(1):64-70. doi:10.1016/j.dmpk.2018.11.004
- ↑ Kiss S, Krawitz J, Fine HF. Coming of Age: Biosimilars. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina. 2018;49(3):162-165. doi:10.3928/23258160-20180221-02
- ↑ 15.0 15.1 15.2 Sharma A, Reddy P, Kuppermann BD, Bandello F, Loewenstein A. Biosimilars in ophthalmology: “Is there a big change on the horizon?” Clin Ophthalmol. 2018;Volume 12:[[2]]. doi:10.2147/OPTH.S180393
- ↑ Entine J. FDA Balances Costs, Patient Safety in the Biologics and Personalized Medicine Revolution. Forbes. Accessed June 22, 2023. https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonentine/2012/07/23/fda-balances-costs-patient-safety-in-the-biologics-and-personalized-medicine-revolution-will-it-get-it-right-or-damage-the-miracle-industry/
- ↑ DiMasi JA, Grabowski HG, Hansen RW. Innovation in the pharmaceutical industry: New estimates of R&D costs. J Health Econ. 2016;47:20-33. doi:10.1016/j.jhealeco.2016.01.012
- ↑ 18.0 18.1 Kaiser, Peter K. MD*; Schmitz-Valckenberg, Marc Steffen MD†,‡; Holz, Frank G. MD†. ANTI–VASCULAR ENDOTHELIAL GROWTH FACTOR BIOSIMILARS IN OPHTHALMOLOGY. Retina 42(12):p [[3]], December 2022. | DOI: 10.1097/IAE.0000000000003626
- ↑ McDonnell S, Principe RF, Zamprognio MS, et al. Challenges and Emerging Technologies in Biomanufacturing of Monoclonal Antibodies (mAbs). In: Biotechnology - Biosensors, Biomaterials and Tissue Engineering Annual Volume 2023. IntechOpen; 2022. doi:10.5772/intechopen.108565
- ↑ Williams GA, Repka MX, Glasser DB. The Promise and Perils of Biosimilars in Ophthalmology. Ophthalmol Retina. 2022;6(7):537-539. doi:10.1016/j.oret.2022.03.018
- ↑ 21.0 21.1 Scientific Considerations in Demonstrating Biosimilarity to a Reference Product. U.S. Depertment of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration; 2015. https://www.fda.gov/media/82647/download
- ↑ Kim E, Han J, Chae Y, et al. Evaluation of the Structural, Physicochemical, and Biological Characteristics of SB11, as Lucentis® (Ranibizumab) Biosimilar. Ophthalmol Ther. 2022;11(2):639-652. doi:10.1007/s40123-022-00453-7
- ↑ Lee H, Sharma A, Woo SJ. Clinical Trials of Aflibercept Biosimilars: A Review. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther. 2025 Sep;41(7):363-369. doi: 10.1089/jop.2025.0040. Epub 2025 Jun 17. PMID: 40526023.
- ↑ Koksaldi S, Karti O, Saatci AO. Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapies in ophthalmology. Med Hypothesis Discov Innov Ophthalmol. 2025 Sep 27;14(3):107-135. doi: 10.51329/mehdiophthal1526. PMID: 41111635; PMCID: PMC12528764.
- ↑ Aljuhani, H. S., Hubayni, R. A., Qedair, J., Bukhari, Z. M., Alzahrani, A., Bawazir, R. O., … Alqahtani, F. (2026). Efficacy and Safety of Aflibercept Biosimilars Relative to Reference Aflibercept Therapy for Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Clinical Ophthalmology, 19, 1911–1918. https://doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S524395
- ↑ Sawires K, Nithianandan H, Somani S. Comparative outcomes of aflibercept biosimilars and reference aflibercept in nAMD: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open Ophthalmol. 2025 Nov 2;10(1):e002509. doi: 10.1136/bmjophth-2025-002509. PMID: 41177553; PMCID: PMC12581046.
- ↑ 27.0 27.1 Al-Shammari YM, AlDhafiri YM, Ahmad AK, Alkharraz BB, Al-Awadhi MA, Alnabhan RM. Clinical efficacy and safety of anti-VEGF biosimilars compared to reference anti-VEGF agents for neovascular age-related macular degeneration: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression. Int Ophthalmol. 2026 Mar 20;46(1):168. doi: 10.1007/s10792-026-04043-5. PMID: 41860622.
- ↑ Stewart MW. Predicted biologic activity of intravitreal bevacizumab. Retina. 2007 Nov-Dec;27(9):1196-200. doi: 10.1097/IAE.0b013e318158ea28. PMID: 18046224.
- ↑ CATT Research Group; Martin DF, Maguire MG, Ying GS, Grunwald JE, Fine SL, Jaffe GJ. Ranibizumab and bevacizumab for neovascular age-related macular degeneration. N Engl J Med. 2011 May 19;364(20):1897-908. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1102673. Epub 2011 Apr 28. PMID: 21526923; PMCID: PMC3157322.
- ↑ VanderBeek BL, Bonaffini SG, Ma L. Association of compounded bevacizumab with postinjection endophthalmitis. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2015 Oct;133(10):1159-64. doi: 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2015.2556. PMID: 26270251; PMCID: PMC4600036.
- ↑ Wang H, Bahrami B, Huang S, Tahmasebi Sarvestani M, Cugati S, Lake S, Chan WO, Supramaniam D, Little M. Safety of an Intravitreal Bevacizumab Biosimilar (MVASI). Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2025 Jul;53(5):523-528. doi: 10.1111/ceo.14515. Epub 2025 Mar 5. PMID: 40040560; PMCID: PMC12235104.
- ↑ Friedman S, London N, Hamouz J, Kerényi Á, Papp A, Pregun T, Chow V, Bautista B, Wang D, Grachev G, Franklin J. Randomized Trial of Biosimilar ABP 938 Compared with Reference Aflibercept in Adults with Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration. Ophthalmol Retina. 2026 Feb;10(2):152-164. doi: 10.1016/j.oret.2025.07.015. Epub 2025 Aug 5. PMID: 40769491.
- ↑ Ota, H., Takeuchi, J., Nonogaki, R. et al. Efficacy of switching from existing anti-vascular endothelial growth factor drugs to ranibizumab biosimilar in neovascular age-related macular degeneration. Jpn J Ophthalmol 69, 886–893 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10384-025-01224-0
- ↑ Gismero Moreno SM, Jódar Sánchez F, García-Agua Soler N, Rivas Ruiz F, Garcia-Ruiz AJ. Model-based pharmacoeconomic analysis of anti-VEGF strategies for neovascular age-related macular degeneration: a value-based comparison of real-world administration approaches. BMJ Open. 2025 Oct 7;15(10):e103539. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2025-103539. PMID: 41062151; PMCID: PMC12506087.
- ↑ Zhang C, Friedman S, Mruthyunjaya P, Parikh R. The Biosimilar Paradox: How Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Biosimilars Could Increase Patient and Overall Health Care Costs. Ophthalmology. 2023 Sep;130(9):966-972. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2023.04.019. Epub 2023 Apr 26. PMID: 37116720.
