In further defense of nonclinical abuse liability testing of biologics.

Risk assessment is not a choice. Drug Abuse Liability (DAL) is mandated under international and national drug control statutes for all drugs targeting the CNS. Once administered to humans many biologics may have long-lived or permanent physiological effects that make DAL testing arduous. We respond to premises of a recently published position on DAL testing of biologics by de Zafra et al. (2018). We propose that, at a minimum, Sponsors submitting a Biologics Licensure Application (BLA) must think "outside the box" and include differential study designs for the same three core small NME assays detailed in the current DAL guidelines (self-administration, drug discrimination, and dependence liability). Abuse liability testing for drug scheduling decisions for marketing approval are not excluded or limited from risk assessment analysis simply because the entity is a biologic. In fact, more robust study designs may be necessary to address alterations in the reinforcing and discriminative stimulus effects of common drugs of abuse, as well as the dependence liability of the biologic, itself.