The expectation of achieving potentially significant health-system cost savings stemming from competition among an increasing number of available biosimilars has led to widespread interest in developing modeling techniques that can accurately estimate the economic impact of biosimilar adoption.
The expectation of achieving potentially significant health-system cost savings stemming from competition among an increasing number of available biosimilars has led to widespread interest in developing modeling techniques that can accurately estimate the economic impact of biosimilar adoption.
Budget Impact Analysis (BIA) is 1 commonly used methodology for evaluating the economic implications of biosimilar adoption. While some methods of economic evaluation consider the efficiency of healthcare resource allocation, BIA considers its affordability. BIAs are used to address expected changes in healthcare system expenditures after the adoption of a new intervention, and are also used to budget or plan resources. Many countries have incorporated BIAs into formulary listings or decision-making regarding reimbursement at national, regional, and local levels since the 1990s. Despite their growing importance in healthcare decision-making, however, BIAs have not been widely published, according to a new literature review published in PharmacoEconomics.
Steven Simoens, MSc, PhD, of the Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences at Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium, and colleagues performed a review of the published BIA literature and identified only 12 unique publications that were generally in line with international recommendations for such studies, but even these reports had many deficiencies that the authors say make it difficult to fully understand the potential economic impact and value of biosimilars, the impact of biosimilar supply, and price competition.
The 12 studies the researchers found had “considerable” limitations, which included the range of included costs and reliance on assumptions instead of robust data, a lack of peer-reviewed journal articles, a limited range of cost parameters, reliance on assumptions for parameters such as uptake and drug pricing, a lack of expert validation, and a limited range of sensitivity analyses that were based on arbitrary ranges. To fully understand the potential economic impact and value of biosimilars, the authors said, BIAs should include the impact of biosimilar supply, manufacturer-provided supporting services, and price competition.
The investigators note that most clinical and payer experience with biosimilars stems from European countries that have a single-payer mechanism. In the United States, the implications of biosimilar utilization can be expected to differ because the market is categorized by multiple payers and greater fluidity, both in terms of formulary structure and patients’ choice of different health plans. “Although biosimilar uptake outside of the United States can provide some insight, the unique nature of the US market undoubtedly will result in different interpretations of the value of biosimilars,” they explain. The lack of published data on the budget impact of biosimilars limits interpretation, and additional economic models of biosimilars are needed to assess the range of their potential budget impact on the US healthcare system, the authors conclude.
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.
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.
What AmerisourceBergen's Report Reveals About Payers, Biosimilar Pricing Trends
May 28th 2023On this episode of Not So Different, Tasmina Hydery and Brian Biehn from AmerisourceBergen discussed results from a recent survey, that were also presented at Asembia 2023, diving into the payer perspective on biosimilars and current pricing trends across the US biosimilar industry.
Rising Biosimilar Adoption for an Italian Payer Will Benefit National Health Care System, Patients
April 9th 2024Data from 2021 and 2022 indicates increasing biosimilar use in an Italian health care company, with potential for full adoption in the future, benefiting both the National Health System and citizens through efficient and sustainable health care policies.
Review Highlights Most Popular European Policies to Boost Biosimilar Uptake
April 3rd 2024Although tender systems are a common strategy to encourage biosimilar utilization across Europe, policies like automatic substitution are rarely utilized, according to a systematic review of European policies and biosimilar uptake.