Before the Wisconsin State Assembly’s health committee today is Assembly Bill 679, an act to address biosimilar substitution at the pharmacy level.
Before the Wisconsin State Assembly’s health committee today is Assembly Bill 679, an act to address biosimilar substitution at the pharmacy level. The state Senate passed the measure as Senate Bill 575 last week.
Under the bill, pharmacists can dispense cheaper interchangeable biosimilars instead of brand-name biologics unless the prescriber opposes the substitution. This strategy would follow the current process for the substitution of generic drugs in the pharmacy setting. The bill defines an “interchangeable biological product” as a biological product that the FDA says meets standards for interchangeability pursuant to federal law. Thus far, however, the FDA has not granted any biosimilar an interchangeable designation.
The Wisconsin State Journal reports that the 2 Republican lead sponsors of the bill, Representative Mike Rohrkaste and Senator Leah Vukmir, presenting in the Assembly today, say that allowing pharmacy-level substitution could save consumers up to 20%. “This bill will result in the lowering of prescription drug prices for Wisconsin families and seniors,” said Vukimir during a public hearing in December 2017.
Since 2013, 35 states and Puerto Rico have introduced and subsequently passed legislation on biologics and biosimilar substitution, according to the National Conference of State Legislature.
While the specifics of state laws vary, most legislation regarding biosimilar substitution includes 5 principles endorsed by Biotechnology Innovation Organization (BIO), a biotech industry trade group. BIO considers these principles essential to overcome specific challenges with biologics:
Notably, laws in Georgia, Idaho, Kentucky, Montana, Nevada, New Jersey, and North Carolina do not require pharmacists to notify patients of substitution. In fact, Florida does not even require prescriber notification when a substitution is made.
Several patient groups in addition to drug makers Pfizer, Amgen, AbbVie, and Johnson & Johnson reportedly support Assembly Bill 679.
Biosimilar Market Development Requires Strategic Flexibility and Global Partnerships
April 29th 2025Thriving in the evolving biosimilar market demands bold collaboration, early global partnerships, and a fresh approach to development strategies to overcome uncertainty and drive future success.
Will the FTC Be More PBM-Friendly Under a Second Trump Administration?
February 23rd 2025On this episode of Not So Different, we explore the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) second interim report on pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) with Joe Wisniewski from Turquoise Health, discussing key issues like preferential reimbursement, drug pricing transparency, biosimilars, shifting regulations, and how a second Trump administration could reshape PBM practices.
BioRationality: EMA Accepts Waiver of Clinical Efficacy Testing of Biosimilars
April 21st 2025Sarfaraz K. Niazi, PhD, shares his latest citizen's petition to the FDA, calling on the agency to waive clinical efficacy testing in response to the European Medicines Agency's (EMA) efforts towards the same goal.
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.
How State Substitution Laws Shape Insulin Biosimilar Adoption
April 15th 2025States with fewer restrictions on biosimilar substitution tend to see higher uptake of interchangeable insulin glargine, showing how even small policy details can significantly influence biosimilar adoption and expand access to more affordable insulin.
Experts Pressure Congress to Remove Roadblocks for Biosimilars
April 12th 2025Lawmakers and expert witnesses emphasized the potential of biosimilars to lower health care costs by overcoming barriers like pharmacy benefit manager practices, limited awareness, and regulatory delays to improve access and competition in chronic disease management during a recent congressional hearing.