On December 13, the House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce’s Subcommittee on Health heard testimony from a variety of healthcare stakeholders in a hearing titled “Examining the Drug Supply Chain.” During the proceeding, a follow-up to a hearing on implementation of the 21st Century Cures Act, several witnesses focused their attention on the promise of—and challenges specific to—biosimilars in the US marketplace.
On December 13, the House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce’s Subcommittee on Health heard testimony from a variety of healthcare stakeholders in a hearing titled “Examining the Drug Supply Chain.” During the proceeding, a follow-up to a hearing on implementation of the 21st Century Cures Act, several witnesses focused their attention on the promise of—and challenges specific to—biosimilars in the US marketplace.
Chester (Chip) Davis Jr, president and CEO of the Association of Accessible Medicines, testified to the benefits that biosimilar and generic competition bring to the healthcare market, but said that the balance between innovation and accessibility of drugs is being threatened by reimbursement frameworks, the abuse of laws and regulations by bad actors, and the failure of policy to account for the challenges facing generics and biosimilars.
“In fact,” said Davis, “while brand drug innovation has benefited from a series of subsequent laws establishing incentives and development tools, the generic and biosimilar marketplace and patient access has not received an equivalent level of attention.”
Davis called for a repeal of the “misguided” penalty on generic drugs under Medicaid, the passage of the bipartisan CREATES Act and the FAST Generics Act, and the creation of a “level and competitive playing field” for biosimilars in Medicare. In particular, Davis pointed to the “perverse incentive for health plans and patients to use a higher-priced brand biologic” created by the structure of Medicare Part D’s coverage gap.
“This approach creates substantial barriers for biosimilar manufacturers, as it may be effectively impossible to ever offer sufficient discounts to be included on Part D formularies,” he warned, calling for an amendment to the Part D coverage gap discount program to classify biosimilars as “applicable drugs.”
Davis also took an opportunity to highlight the recent scandal surrounding Allergan’s patent transfer to the St Regis Mohawk tribe in its efforts to shield Restasis patents from inter partes review challenges, echoing FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, MD, in using the term “shenanigan” to describe Allergan’s novel strategy. While Restasis is not a biologic, Davis suggested that biologics and biosimilars are subject to similar anti-competitive practices that are keeping the United States from attaining the promise of biosimilars.
Also testifying was Matt Eyles, senior executive vice president and chief operating officer of America’s Health Insurance Plans, who attested to the importance of biosimilars in the US marketplace.
“Some of the costliest and most widely-used biologics have been on the market for decades without biosimilar competition,” said Eyles. “To achieve this promise, it is important to ensure that the FDA promulgates regulations that promote a robust market and ensure providers and patients have unbiased information available to them about the benefits of biosimilars.”
Eyles called on the FDA to aim for greater clarity—and to reduce unnecessary regulatory hurdles—in its policies concerning labeling, naming, and interchangeability of biosimilars.
Additionally, Lori M. Reilly, executive vice president of policy research and membership for the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, testified that finalizing FDA guidance documents related to biosimilars is necessary to reduce regulatory uncertainties for biosimilar manufactures and to accelerate the market entry of these products, which Reilly estimated would account for a $38 billion erosion in sales of brand-named biologics by 2021.
Julie Reed: Why 2024 Is Important for Biosimilars
April 17th 2024Julie Reed, executive director of the Biosimilars Forum, showcases how the biosimilar industry is expected to develop throughout 2024, including major policy changes and hope for continued improvement in market share for adalimumab biosimilars.
Exploring the Biosimilar Horizon: Julie Reed's Predictions for 2024
February 18th 2024On this episode of Not So Different, Julie Reed, executive director of the Biosimilars Forum, returns to discuss her predictions for the biosimilar industry for 2024 and beyond as well as the impact that the Forum's 4 new members will have on the organization's mission.
Alvotech’s Stelara Biosimilar, Selarsdi, Receives FDA Approval
April 16th 2024Alvotech’s Selarsdi (ustekinumab-aekn), a biosimilar referencing Stelara (ustekinumab), gained FDA approval, making it the second ustekinumab biosimilar and second for the company to be given the green light for the American market.
A New Chapter: How 2023 Will Shape the US Biosimilar Space for 2024 and Beyond
December 31st 2023On this episode of Not So Different, Cencora's Brian Biehn and Corey Ford take a look back at major policy and regulatory advancements in 2023 and how these changes will alter the space going forward.
BioRationality: Removing the Misconceptions Surrounding Interchangeability
April 15th 2024Sarfaraz K. Niazi, PhD, outlines the current state of interchangeable biosimilars in the US and policy changes needed to clear up misconceptions surrounding the meaning behind interchangeability designations.
Global Biosimilar Market Projected to Reach $1.3 Trillion by 2032
April 11th 2024The global biosimilar market is projected to surge from $25.1 billion in 2022 to approximately $1.3 trillion by 2032, with a compound annual growth rate of 17.6%, driven mainly by the increasing prevalence of cancer and the cost-effectiveness of biosimilars, as outlined in a report by Towards Healthcare.