Assessment of nanomedicines and nanosimilars: Clinical pharmacists’ knowledge and regulatory gaps

BackgroundNon-Biological Complex Drugs (NBCDs), including nanomedicines, are characterized by complex manufacturing processes. The slightest change in this process can lead to changes in the efficacy, safety, and quality of the product. New legislation to be adopted in the EU will help ensure a proper regulatory assessment which will improve patient safety. Meanwhile, there is currently no robust integrated curriculum on the use and interchangeability of nanomedicines and their respective follow-on medicine, commonly referred to as nanosimilars. Nanomedicines have been available in the EU since 1996. As the patents of these medicines expire, it is important that healthcare professionals are suitably prepared for future interchangeability programs.ObjectivesTo analyze clinical pharmacists' understanding of nanomedicines, nanosimilars, and the requirements needed to prepare the clinical ground to ensure safe and optimum interchangeability.MethodsA fourteen-question survey was constructed for clinical pharmacists in Germany, Italy, and Portugal, comprising a variety of hospital sizes and specializations. A combination of numerical ranking, yes/no, and open-ended questions was utilized.Results20 pharmacists in Germany, 9 in Italy, and 20 in Portugal completed the survey in entirety. On a scale ranging from 0 to 10, the three countries combined indicated an understanding of nanomedicines as 3.69 and their understanding of nanosimilars as 2.92. Open-ended prompts contained statements indicating the lack of clinical familiarity, regulations/policies provided, and the additional resources they would like to receive.ConclusionThe survey confirmed the need for more guidance from health-system institutions, medical agencies, and pharmaceutical manufacturers. Respondents desired opportunities to learn from webinars, newsletters, guidelines, and/or informational sessions.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal of Risk & Safety in Medicine
Published
2025-09-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/09246479251382360
Primary Topic
Pharmaceutical studies and practices
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Assessment of nanomedicines and nanosimilars: Clinical pharmacists’ knowledge and regulatory gaps

Courtney Fella, Mike Isles, John B. Hertig
International Journal of Risk & Safety in Medicine
Pharmaceutical studies and practices
article

Assessment of nanomedicines and nanosimilars: Clinical pharmacists’ knowledge and regulatory gaps

Courtney Fella, Mike Isles, John B. Hertig
article en

Abstract

BackgroundNon-Biological Complex Drugs (NBCDs), including nanomedicines, are characterized by complex manufacturing processes. The slightest change in this process can lead to changes in the efficacy, safety, and quality of the product. New legislation to be adopted in the EU will help ensure a proper regulatory assessment which will improve patient safety. Meanwhile, there is currently no robust integrated curriculum on the use and interchangeability of nanomedicines and their respective follow-on medicine, commonly referred to as nanosimilars. Nanomedicines have been available in the EU since 1996. As the patents of these medicines expire, it is important that healthcare professionals are suitably prepared for future interchangeability programs.ObjectivesTo analyze clinical pharmacists' understanding of nanomedicines, nanosimilars, and the requirements needed to prepare the clinical ground to ensure safe and optimum interchangeability.MethodsA fourteen-question survey was constructed for clinical pharmacists in Germany, Italy, and Portugal, comprising a variety of hospital sizes and specializations. A combination of numerical ranking, yes/no, and open-ended questions was utilized.Results20 pharmacists in Germany, 9 in Italy, and 20 in Portugal completed the survey in entirety. On a scale ranging from 0 to 10, the three countries combined indicated an understanding of nanomedicines as 3.69 and their understanding of nanosimilars as 2.92. Open-ended prompts contained statements indicating the lack of clinical familiarity, regulations/policies provided, and the additional resources they would like to receive.ConclusionThe survey confirmed the need for more guidance from health-system institutions, medical agencies, and pharmaceutical manufacturers. Respondents desired opportunities to learn from webinars, newsletters, guidelines, and/or informational sessions.

International Journal of Risk & Safety in MedicineVol. 37(1)
Butler University (US), Safe States Alliance (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 63%
Pharmaceutical studies and practices
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.