Bone Health

Immunology

Hematology

Respiratory

Dermatology

Diabetes

Gastroenterology

Neurology

Oncology

Ophthalmology

Rare Disease

Rheumatology

News

All News

Product Approvals and Launches

Media

All Videos

Insights

Interviews

Peer Exchange

Podcasts

Stakeholder Summit

Compendia

Conferences

Conference Coverage

Conference Listing

CME/CE

Resources

Authors

Biosimilar Resources

Interactive Tools

Partners

Polls and Quizzes

WHEN CHOICE ARRIVES: Competition & Consequences

Subscribe

BIOSIMILAR APPROVALS

Skylar Jeremias is the Managing Editor for The Center for Biosimilars and The American Journal of Managed Care (AJMC).

Articles

Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who switched from Enbrel (reference etanercept) to a biosimilar maintained remission, even after their dose was reduced, with no signs of worsening based on clinical scores, ultrasound scans, or lab tests, according to a new study.

Etanercept Biosimilar Switch Shows Stable Outcomes and Disease Control in RA

Australia’s growing reliance on high-cost biologics for inflammatory skin diseases has placed significant pressure on its health system—but a new report suggests biosimilars could offer financial relief, provided uptake barriers are addressed through policy reform and education.

Paving the Way for Equitable Biosimilar Access in Australian Dermatology Clinics

Cameron Santoro is an associate editor for The Center for Biosimilars

Videos

Elena Wolff-Holz, MD, discussed the approval and benefits of the ustekinumab biosimilar, Yesintek, emphasizing its comparable efficacy and safety to Stelara, and potential for increased patient access due to lower costs, and a possible lower immunogenicity profile.

Yesintek Biosimilar Shows Comparable Efficacy, Lower Immunogenicity Than Stelara, Says Elena Wolff-Holz, MD

Monthly savings from fully converting Medicare patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) and non-squamous metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) from reference bevacizumab to bevacizumab-bvzr could fund 13,887 and 8,959 additional patient-months of treatment, respectively, according to a cost-effectiveness study.

Switching From Avastin to Bevacizumab-bvzr in CRC, NSCLC Can Reduce Medicare Costs

About

Editorial

Contact

Advisory Board

Do Not Sell My Information

Terms & Conditions

Privacy Policy

Center for Biosimilars®

Facebook

Twitter

LinkedIn

Business Practice

Business

Development

Legal

Policy

Practice

Regulatory

1rem

Clinical

Treatment Gaps in the Management of Generalized Pustular Psoriasis: Enhancing the Role of Managed Care

Advancing Patient Outcomes in Hidradenitis Suppurativa: Updates and Strategies for Managed Care

Welcome to another insightful episode of Not So Different: a Podcast from The Center for Biosimilars. In this episode, we bring you detailed coverage of the trends, challenges, and insights gathered from the Festival of Biologics USA. 

Your host, Skylar Jeremias, assistant managing editor of The Center for Biosimilars

, and guest Dracey Poore, director of biosimilars at Cardinal Health, delve into the crucial themes that emerged from the conference discussions, mainly, the essential role of sustainability in the biosimilar industry. You'll hear about the forward thinking vision of the biopharmaceutical sector, as they maneuver through the evolving biosimilar landscape in their quest to make critical medications accessible to patients.

The conversation travels deeper into the biosimilar ecosystem as Poore explains the effect of significant challenges obstructing the widespread adoption and affordability of biosimilars. 

With insights from the richly detailed Cardinal Health Biosimilar Report, Jeremias and Poore guide you through the evolving prescriber trends and insights that influence biosimilar adoption alongside constructive strategies to overcome these hurdles. This episode sheds light on the importance of ongoing education, dismantling access barriers and promoting a competitive biosimilar market for a better health care landscape.

To read our coverage of the Cardinal Health report, 

To check out The Center for Biosimilars coverage of Festival of Biologics USA, 

00:03:48: Discussion on Cardinal Health Biosimilar Report and challenges to biosimilar adoption

00:04:48: Best practices for managing biosimilar inventories

00:08:05: Legislative efforts impacting the biosimilar landscape

00:10:38: Impact of payer preferences for reference products over biosimilars

00:13:36: Concluding thoughts on the future of biosimilars

Cardinal Health

The discussion highlights key emerging trends from the Festival of Biologics conference and the annual Cardinal Health Biosimilars Report, including the importance of sustainability in the health care landscape and the challenges and successes in biosimilar adoption and affordability.

Insights from Festival of Biologics: Dracey Poore Discusses Cardinal Health’s 2024 Biosimilar Report

On this episode of Not So Different, The Center for Biosimilars

 discusses all the conference coverage, adalimumab data, and market insights to come out of the biosimilar dermatology space in March 2024.

AAD Posters Examine Clinical Effects of Switching to Ustekinumab, Adalimumab Biosimilars

Posters From AMCCBS and AAD Showcase New Technology for Biosimilar Uptake, Barriers to Self-Injectable Biologics

Webinar Addresses Solutions to Improve Adalimumab Biosimilar Uptake

Adalimumab Expenditures in Countries With and Without Available Biosimilars

Review: Real-World Evidence Confirms Effectiveness and Safety of Adalimumab Biosimilar SB5

Study: More Biosimilar Competition Is Not Lowering Patient OOP Costs

Cardinal Health Report Showcases Biosimilar Growth, Provider and Payer Evolution, and More

On this episode of Not So Different, The Center for Biosimilars® discusses all the conference coverage, adalimumab data, and market insights to come out of the biosimilar dermatology space in March 2024.

Biosimilars Dermatology Roundup for March 2024—Podcast Edition

Patent thickets, patent litigation, patent dances—all of these legal terms have plagued the biosimilar space, causing many biosimilar products to launch well after the originator's market exclusivity was supposed to expire. A perfect example of this is the Stelara (ustekinumab) space, where patent litigation settlements have led to delayed market access for ustekinumab biosimilars from late 2023 to early 2025. Additionally, congressional leaders have had to investigate AbbVie for potentially abusing the patent system to stall biosimilar competition for Humira (adalimumab).

But why does the system work like this? What can be done to improve it? What actions can be taken to ensure the patent system doesn't hinder competition and innovation?

On this episode of Not So Different, Ha Kung Wong, JD, an intellectual patent attorney partner at Venable LLP, details the confusing landscape that is the US patent system and how it can be improved to help companies overcome barriers to biosimilar competition.

To read more of Ha Kung's thoughts on the US patent system and its role in the biosimilar landscape, 

To learn more about Congress' role in addressing AbbVie's alleged anticompetitive practices regarding adalimumab products, 

To learn more about the suit filed by CareFirst BlueCross BlueShield regarding ustekinumab biosimilar delays, 

To learn more about the settlements that have resulted in the market delay of ustekinumab biosimilars, 

To learn more about lawsuits involving AbbVie that led to the delayed market entrance of adalimumab biosimilars, 

To learn more about what types of patents are at most to blame for biosimilar market delays, 

On this episode of Not So Different, Ha Kung Wong, JD, an intellectual patent attorney and partner at Venable LLP, details the confusing landscape that is the US patent system and how it can be improved to help companies overcome barriers to biosimilar competition.

Decoding the Patent Puzzle: Navigating the Legal Landscape of Biosimilars

As 2023 comes to a close, we look back on some of the major advancements from the past year, from the long-awaited market introduction of adalimumab biosimilars in the US, to the first major regulatory approvals for neurology biosimilars, to the implementation of key policy initiatives around the globe.

A lot of eyes have been on the United States and 2024 shapes up to be another big year for the biosimilar industry, with approvals for denosumab, aflibercept, and on-body pegfilgrastim biosimilars on the way. Additionally, the nation will continue to see the fallout from the implementation of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), including its policies regarding Medicare price negotiations, as well as the role interchangeability designations will play into adoption rates. It also remains to be seen whether payers and pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) are ready to embrace newer biosimilars and add them to formularies as preferred products, leaving the future for a sustainable biosimilar industry up in the air.

Today, I'm joined by Brian Biehn, senior director of biosimilar commercialization, and Corey Ford, vice president of reimbursement and patient access, and policy insights at Cencora (formerly AmerisourceBergen). Both of them have been keeping a close watch on the biosimilar space throughout the year and today's discussion will surround how this year sets up a new chapter for the industry.

To learn more about the prospect for Neulasta OnPro biosimilars, 

To learn more about how the IRA will impact biosimilars, 

To learn more about the dual-pricing strategy being used for adalimumab biosimilars, 

To hear Brian's insight into how the ophthalmology biosimilar industry is developing, 

To listen to previous Not So Different episodes featuring more of Brian's insight into how the adalimumab market will develop and biosimilar pricing trends, 

On 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.

A New Chapter: How 2023 Will Shape the US Biosimilar Space for 2024 and Beyond

When it comes to the US biosimilar industry as a whole, adalimumab is on everyone's mind. 2023 ushered in a new age for these products and so far, 8 adalimumab biosimilars have entered the market and companies are looking for any way to stand out from the crowd. Some have chosen to use a dual pricing strategy to both get on formulary and offer steep discounts, some have chosen to align their prices more with the reference product (Humira), some are leaning on their interchangeability or high-concentration labeling in hopes of becoming the new preferred adalimumab option among pharmacy benefit managers and providers. However, whether these new biosimilars, if any of them, will gain significant market share or generate meaningful savings for Americans will remain to be seen.

Today, we're joined by Fran Gregory, PharmD, MBA, vice president of emerging therapies at Cardinal Health, to discuss the initial market reaction to adalimumab biosimilars and her predictions for how the rest of the year will play out. Gregory recently published a paper claiming that adalimumab biosimilars will transform the US health care industry and she's been keeping a keen eye on how this is playing out in the real-world setting. She's also well-versed on the European and Canadian experiences with these products and can provide valued insight into how the United States' health system can champion the use of these products.

To read more about Dr. Gregory's commentary piece, 

To read more about Cardinal Health's 2023 Biosimilars Report, 

To learn more about adalimumab biosimilars, 

To learn more about the adalimumab biosimilars that have launched so far in the US:

 for the launches of Hyrimoz, Hadlima, Yusimry, and Cyltezo

On this episode of Not So Different, Fran Gregory, PharmD, MBA, vice president of emerging therapies at Cardinal Health, analyzes the adalimumab market so far in the United States and provides insight into how the market needs to adapt to accept these products and ensure lower drug costs for patients.


Dr Fran Gregory Sizes Up the US Adalimumab Market: Will Biosimilars See Success?

Shanghai Henlius Biotech is a growing China-based biopharmaceutical manufacturer that’s been working in the biosimilars space for some time. The company recently got approval for their 40 mg/ml low-concentration adalimumab biosimilar in December 2020 and is currently focused on marketing that in China. They have a plan to develop a high-concentration adalimumab biosimilar in the future to compete alongside AbbVie’s high-concentration formulation of the reference product, Humira. The company is also in the process of developing biosimilars for programmed death-1 (PD-1) inhibitors, which are used to treat several types of cancers.

We sat down with Ping Cao, vice president of Business Development for Henlius, to discuss the company’s current biosimilar development plans and how the regulatory process in China differs from those of Europe and the United States.

To hear more comments from Ping Cao, click 

To learn more about Henlius’ development plans, click 

To learn more about Henlius’ approval for their adalimumab biosimilar, click 

To learn more about PD-1 inhibitors, click 

Ping Cao, vice president of Business Development for Shanghai Henlius Biotech, discussed the company's current biosimilar development plans and the process for getting regulatory approval for biosimilars in China.

Not So Different: How Henlius is Making Its Mark on the Global Biosimilar Industry

A wave of biosimilar approvals, aggressive pricing strategies, and a regulatory sea change are setting the stage for unprecedented momentum in the US biologics market, with 2025 already proving to be a landmark year in reshaping cost, access, and innovation across therapeutic areas.

Samsung Bioepis Report Signals Turning Point for US Biosimilars

A plain language summary for patients explains there were no differences in safety outcomes between adalimumab-adbm and the originator in a pooled analysis of the VOLTAIRE clinical trials.

Clinical Evidence Shows No Safety Gaps Between Biosimilar, Reference Adalimumab

Sandoz's antitrust suit against Amgen, the FDA’s interchangeability designation for Celltrion’s adalimumab biosimilar, and the inclusion of an ustekinumab biosimilar in Costco’s prescription program highlight growing momentum to expand biosimilar access and affordability for patients with chronic inflammatory diseases.

Eye on Pharma: Sandoz Files Antitrust Suit; Yuflyma Interchangeability; Costco’s Ustekinumab Pick

During Q1 2025, pharmaceutical companies accelerated biosimilar expansion through strategic acquisitions and partnerships in hopes of boosting patient access to lower-cost treatments in immunology and oncology.

Latest Biosimilar Deals Signal Growth Across Immunology, Oncology Markets

Elena Wolff-Holz, MD

Elena Wolff-Holz, MD, global head of clinical development at Biocon Biologics, discussed the approval of 

, for psoriasis treatment, a biosimilar referencing Stelara (ustekinumab). She highlighted the comparable efficacy and safety with reference Stelara, including positive switching data.


Wolff-Holz believes biosimilars will increase patient access through reduced costs and suggests that reference product manufacturers should focus on innovative drug development. She noted that Yesintek has shown to be less immunogenic than the reference product, potentially offering an additional benefit to patients.

This transcript was lightly edited for clarity; captions were auto-generated.

With the recent launch of three ustekinumab biosimilars in the US market, how do you see BMAb-1200 fitting into this rapidly evolving landscape?

I think the real comparison is really the biosimilars vs the reference medicine product, Stelara. Coming back to what biosimilars are, these are absolutely high quality products, highly regulated products, and the primary analysis really are at the quality level.


Comparative analytical studies are required, many more than you would have for new drug application and you have to look for physical chemical analysis, for biological functional comparability on very, very solid ground and then you go on with the PK study or with another trial. Actually, the onus, really, of the proof is in this initial quality comparison that really, truly, this is the same biologic drug, and this rigidity with which you have to prove the amino acid sequence is the same, the higher order structures are the same, the glycosylation pattern must be within very strict comparability model. All of this must be done by all biosimilar contestants, and you can only get approved if you have these if you have proven that this comparability exists.

One biosimilar vs another, I think here the features would be how the drug is given, so whether you have it in a PFS or other devices, things like that. Otherwise, it's really the same, and it's rather the question, do you still need the reference medicinal product on the market? That's really the question. I mean, they've been around for 10 years or even more, through patent prolongation. I really think their job should be to think of new drugs, innovative drugs. That is their primary capability, that should be their challenge.


I think they should leave the biosimilars alone. Once they're on the market, I think, from my point of view, the reference medicinal product is superfluous.

What are your thoughts on the impact that these biosimilars will have on patient access and the overall cost of psoriasis treatment?

I think BMAb-1200 or Yesintek on the market is just a wonderful addition to ustekinumab antibodies. I think the good news is it is less immunogenic than the reference medicine product. That is something that you observe, typically, not so much because of the product as such, that is the substance, the actual drug substance, but rather the fluid, the excipients that constitute the other part that makes up the medicinal product. This is something I would say that is quite, quite beneficial.


I think obviously the biggest advantage is reduced price, affordability is a big thing. Bringing down the costs considerably, and by doing that, increases the access patient access, it’s something that we've seen with many biosimilars.


 has nicely studied this, that this does happen, and it's really important, because ultimately, it improves health care. This would serve both sides and free up the space for more expensive, innovative drugs, but on the other hand, you would have then less expensive biosimilar products. This is something where I would think, Yesintek is a fantastic candidate.

Conference

Sophia Humphreys talks

In an interview, Sophia Humphreys, PharmD, discusses how the expansion of biosimilars into new therapeutic areas, such as immunology, endocrinology, and ophthalmology, has led to increased hesitance compared to the quicker adoption seen in cancer treatment. This is due to the maintenance nature of many therapies, making it harder to switch patients to biosimilars. 

She emphasizes the need for patient and provider education about the safety, efficacy, and similarity of biosimilars. When addressing adalimumab biosimilars, Humphreys highlights factors such as product formulation preferences, interchangeability regulations, and payer coverage as key drivers in market competition.

This transcript has been edited for clarity.

How do new therapeutic classes and indications for biosimilars influence market expansion?

I think this goes beyond just patient education. And, for example, when we started with just the cancer curative and supportive agents, biosimilars, those are quickly adopted, and once we start to move into immunology, endocrinology and ophthalmology, now we started to observe more hesitance. 

One reason is because a lot of these are maintenance therapies. So we're not looking at starting a new treatment plan or starting a new cycle treatment with a new biosimilar. We're looking at convincing a patient who has failed several therapies before they reach the [reference] biologics now that could convince them to switch to a biosimilar product. So the first thing is that we really wanted to educate both our patients as well as our providers that these products are highly similar to the reference product. 

There's no evidence of diminished efficacy or increased immunogenicity or safety signals so far. For the past 10 years, we have used biosimilar successfully. And also we really wanted to address our health care system leaders that these biosimilar product in the expanded therapeutic classes would really increase access of care—really providing life saving, life altering medications for more patients.

What are the key factors driving competition among adalimumab biosimilars in the market?

Adalimumab, that's everybody's favorite molecule since July of 2023. So, several factors. This is actually quite similar—adalimumab and infliximab. It's almost similar. For autoimmune disease, as we have mentioned, a lot of patients are on maintenance [therapies]. And adalimumab has so many product [options]. And you really want to see if the product can match the existing product that our patient are using as much as possible. 

For example, if my patient is using a citrate-free product, you probably don't want to switch them to a product that is not citrate-free, which will cause probably more injection site discomfort. And also, a lot of patients prefer higher concentration vs lower concentration. That's another concern. And interchangeability is another concern. 

In a lot of states, we allow pharmacy-level switch, which means when a physician's order is the reference product for adalimumab in the state where they allow pharmacy-level switch, a pharmacist can switch the particular product to a interchangeable biosimilar of the reference adalimumab without a new authorization from the physician who prescribed that originator, because this particular product is interchangeable. 

Of course, different states have different regulations, and you also need to make sure that you meet the communication and information sharing requirement of your state, which means the patient needs to know that you're giving them a different product. The physician would need to know when you did the switching and which product was provided to the patient. Of course, most importantly, we need to know if the biosimilar you are switching to is covered by the patient's payers, and if they provide similar or comparable patient support and especially copay assistance. 

And when we are working with 340B-eligible sites, you would need to consider the switching effect to your 340B accumulation. So, a lot of factors are brought into this consideration. It's a very comprehensive analysis.

Sophia Humphreys, PharmD, from Sutter Health explains that expanding biosimilars into new therapeutic areas faces hesitance due to maintenance therapies, emphasizing the importance of education.

Addressing Hesitance in Biosimilar Adoption

Insights From Cencora's Lakesha Farmer: Innovative Biosimilar Adoption Strategies

Lakesha Farmer, PharmD, MBA, senior director, strategic accounts, ION Oncology Practice Network at Cencora, explains new strategies being used to incentivize biosimilar adoption and market competition in a world where reimbursement and rebate policies cater more towards innovator products.

Can you discuss any innovative pricing and reimbursement models that have been implemented to incentivize biosimilar adoption and market competitiveness?

Sure, since the introduction to the market, we've seen some very unique pricing incidences strategies created to incentivize adoption of biosimilar agents. So, most recently, we've seen manufacturers take a nonbranded and branded approach to the launch of their biosimilars, which offers a low wholesale acquisition costs are WAC and the high WAC option. This pricing approach is currently being seen with insulin biosimilars and adalimumab biosimilars.

For example, the adaIimumab biosimilars Cyltezo was initially launched as a branded, high WAC product that offer about 5% discount to the originator (Humira). The makers of Cyltezo saw that the uptake of the medication was pretty slow, and that not all PBMs [pharmacy benefit managers] and insurers were receptive to adding the slightly discounted medication to their formularies. So, about 3 months after their launch, the manufacturer decided to launch an unbranded, low WAC version of the medication, which was surprisingly about 81% less than the originator product's price. So, by taking this low WAC/high WAC approach to pricing, this caters to all PBMs and issuer plans based upon their preference and increases coverage and access to biosimilar for patients.
The only possible downside to this pricing strategy that I can possibly foresee is that the heavily discounted low WAC options could possibly impact a manufacturer's ability to offer co-pay assistance programs and other patient access resources.

The second unique pricing strategy that incentivizes patients access to biosimilars is the Mark Cuban Cost Plus Program. This program aims to lower patient out-of-pocket costs by offering your Yusimry, an adalimumab biosimilar, to patients for a low cost of $569 [per month]. According to Drugs.com, the average cash price for Humira is about $7,300. As you can see, by offering this biosimilar at a cash price of $569 to uninsured patients, as well as a possible option for commercially insured patients with high deductibles, co-pays, and/or co-insurances can definitely be a game changer.

Now moving on to address the unique reimbursement incentive. Currently, the most notable incentive is the add-on payment for physician administered biosimilars that was introduced under the Inflation Reduction Act. Under this provision biosimilar reimbursement is set at ASP [average sales price] plus 8% of the reference product's ASP, which is higher than the reference product's reimbursement, which is set at ASP plus 6%. This higher reimbursement rate, provided through Medicare, provides community based providers with a greater incentive to use biosimilars for their patients.

Lakesha Farmer, PharmD, MBA, from Cencora discusses innovative pricing and reimbursement models incentivizing biosimilar adoption and competitiveness, including dual pricing strategies and the Mark Cuban Cost Plus Program, while highlighting potential impacts on patient assistance programs.

Insights From Cencora's Dr Lakesha Farmer: Innovative Biosimilar Adoption Strategies

Chelsee Jensen, PharmD, explains adalimumab pricing strategies

Dr Chelsee Jensen Discusses Pricing Strategies for Adalimumab Biosimilars

Chelsee Jensen, PharmD, BCPS, senior pharmacy specialist and pharmaceutical formulary manager at Mayo Clinic, reacts to the interchangeability approval for Abrilada and attempts to explain the purpose of dual-pricing strategies for adalimumab biosimilars.

Several adalimumab products that entered the US market this year launched with 

. Can you explain why a company would use this pricing strategy and do you think this trend will continue in other markets?

I do think with the pharmacy benefit drugs, we might continue to see this trend. And this is happening because, again, from a manufacturer standpoint, in order to get on to some of these insurance formularies, we realize that some insurance companies have a historical precedence of being used to these large back end rebates. So that's, we'll see manufacturers potentially come into the market with 2 list prices to be more appealing to those insurer markets, whether they want the lower discount or the more deeper discount. 

But one thing that we'll have to kind of keep trending and watching out for in this space, especially with adalimumab, is what's happening to the patient. I know a lot of talk or assumption is that the patient will utilize manufacturer co-pay assistance. However, we have to recognize that not every single patient on an insurance plan is going to qualify for that. So are we truly opening up access? And I think that'll just be something to continue to watch as adalimumab biosimilars rollout.

Recently, Abrilada was approved as the second interchangeable adalimumab biosimilar. How do you think the interchangeability label will influence payer preferences and prescription habits in the adalimumab space?

I do think that interchangeable ability makes it much easier. Obviously, you do not need to intervene and contact the provider to change the prescription over. However, I think that smaller community sites could come up with alternative mechanisms such as potentially collaborative practice agreements if their state state laws allow that and that would still kind of get over that operational hurdle of that interchangeability. 

But again, I don't know that they don't necessarily have a huge impact on insurers uptaking biosimilars. I think they're probably going to be focused more on does the delivery of device match what that reference product is and what are those price points.

Chelsee Jensen, PharmD, BCPS, senior pharmacy specialist and pharmaceutical formulary manager at Mayo Clinic, explains the purpose of dual-pricing strategies for adalimumab biosimilars and predicts whether these strategies will occur in other treatment spaces.

Fran Gregory, PharmD, MBA, vice president of emerging therapies at Cardinal Health, believes that adalimumab biosimilars will greatly impact the US health care system. However, whether interchangeable designations will affect the adoption of these products remains to be seen.

With states having different laws regarding interchangeability, new bills being introduced to Congress to eliminate switching study requirements, and only 4 biosimilars overall having an interchangeability designation, what is your view on the value of interchangeability?

Interchangeability introduces an additional cost. When the manufacturers are researching the medication during clinical trials, they are required to go through an additional step. And it's not just a little step; it's an extremely large step involving patients and clinical trials and millions and millions of dollars in additional costs to prove [basically] biosimilarity again, sort of. So, it's really kind of an extra step that's extremely costly, that is really just, again, proving that your medication is indeed the same thing as the reference product.

So I think the opinion that this is an extra, maybe unnecessary step is shared by many and that's why we're seeing these bills being introduced, and I think the bills make sense. They're very tactical. You know, “Here's what language we could remove from the 351(k) FDA approval pathway to kind of back that out and maybe simplify this process.” And not only simplify the process for manufacturers, but simplify the process for physicians, for prescribers, for pharmacists, and for the entire health care system.

Interestingly, for the one interchangeable biosimilar that we have in the adalimumab space today [Cyltezo], it is a higher-cost product. So I do believe that these additional clinical trials are unfortunately going to lead to higher costs being passed through to the product launch. And that's not really what any of us want to see. I love seeing these huge discounts that we're seeing on these new products with the low WAC [wholesale acquisition cost] strategies. And that's what we want to continue to see more of, and if we continue to add costs to the process to get the drug approved, it'll be more difficult for us to bring down this cost long term.

Do you think the interchangeable label will have an impact on adalimumab adoption or do you predict that adoption rates will be more like those in the interchangeable insulin space?

It's interesting; that's one of those kind of “predict the future” questions since we're still in early stages of this launch. However, Cardinal Health publishes a really nice 

Fran Gregory, PharmD, MBA, vice president of emerging therapies at Cardinal Health, explains the value of interchangeability in the adalimumab space and predicts whether interchangeable biosimilars will become leaders in adoption.

Dermatology

Latest News