A gentle, persuasive effort to get patients and physicians to adopt biosimilars is likely to work better than a heavy-handed approach, say Canadian investigators, who recommend more study of how mindsets and prescribing practices are changed.
Physicians and patients worldwide have been slow to use biosimilars, despite clinical trials demonstrating that approved biosimilars are as safe and effective as the reference versions. A recent literature review by Canadian investigators has concluded that, in many countries, a far more systematic effort is required to achieve widespread adoption of biosimilars in clinical practice.
“We [observed] a lack of systematic description of implementation design and evaluation and a paucity of in-depth and engaged research to understand stakeholders’ pragmatic considerations and the knowledge, messages, and meanings that shape clinician and patient decisions to choose biosimilars,” the authors write.
The availability of biosimilars in Canada is about to greatly expand, with 13 biologic drugs losing market exclusivity by 2022. In the Canadian province of British Columbia, a forced switching policy was adopted in 2019 that requires patients in the public health system to use biosimilars for rheumatology and diabetes instead of reference products. The Alberta and Ontario provincial governments both have decided to implement forced biosimilar switching policies.
The authors of the current study conclude that, wherever biosimilars are available, adoption rates may be poor without concurrent education and clear understanding of the clinical environments in which these agents would be prescribed.
The reluctance of physicians and patients to choose biosimilars is widely documented. However, according to the authors, missing from the literature is “implementation science,” evidence on how to transition biosimilars to routine care. In the United States, for example, past investigation has demonstrated a significant need for evidence-based education on biosimilars in the areas of understanding bioequivalence and differentiating between biologics and biosimilars, the authors note.
Acceptance of an innovation into regular clinical practice requires stakeholders to change behaviors or adopt new technologies. Investigators used a diffusion-of-innovations model to examine factors and processes influencing the spread and sustained use of innovations in healthcare.
The authors note that adoption of biosimilars has improved in Scotland and the United Kingdom because of educational measures, but in Germany and Belgium, where biosimilars are available but there is no systematic educational effort, physicians generally prescribe reference products for first-line therapy.
The authors recommend encouraging use of biosimilars at the start of treatment, citing studies on the reluctance of patients to switch from an originator biologic once they are enjoying favorable results. In addition, “when the clinical stakes are high due to the debilitating nature of the illness being treated, there is more anxiety about change,” the authors write.
Regulatory agencies have taken steps to promote biosimilar use. The FDA’s Biosimilar Action Plan, for example, facilitated data sharing with regulatory agencies from other countries to accelerate the approval process for biosimilars already approved in Europe. Both the FDA and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) have provided resources for prescribers on the evidence supporting equivalence of biosimilars to address knowledge gaps.
However, few physician organizations and patient advocacy groups, which are influential for prescribers, promote biosimilar use. The authors of the review cite this as a significant problem. Getting physicians to apply new knowledge into clinical practice requires them to receive persuasive information from many sources: practice guidelines from medical authorities, clinical studies, colleagues and opinion leaders, conferences and continuing education, marketing, experience, and patient preferences.
The advantages of biosimilars are clear when looking at their clinical equivalence to reference products and lower cost. “The advantages of biosimilars versus biologics are less clear when considering adopters’ beliefs and values surrounding care. In Germany and Belgium, where biosimilars are accessible, physicians choose a biologic over a biosimilar for first-line therapy and prioritize treatment efficacy over cost-effectiveness,” the authors write.
They note that the potential for experimentation with biosimilars without risk is limited and this could be a challenge for adoption.
The authors caution against mandatory switching to biosimilars, which they warn does not change ingrained attitudes. Norway mandated automatic switching from infliximab to 1 of 2 biosimilars, with little effect on the market share of the biosimilars.
Subsequently, Norway launched a campaign involving stakeholders and providing education on biosimilars and adjustment of pricing, a more successful strategy that resulted in the 2 approved biosimilars reaching a majority market share.
Reference
Khan D, Luig T, Mosher D, Campbell-Scherer D. Lessons from international experience with biosimilar implementation: an application of the diffusion of innovations model. Healthc Policy. 2020;15(3):16-27. doi: 10.12927/hcpol.2020.26133.
What Clinicians Need to Know About Using Biosimilars to Treat IBD
April 13th 2024A review article, intended to act as a guide for clinicians, summarizes the available infliximab and adalimumab biosimilars for treating inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) as well as others that are coming down the pipeline.
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.
Study: More Biosimilar Competition Is Not Lowering Patient OOP Costs
March 29th 2024Despite more biosimilars entering the market and generating significant savings for payers and health care systems, these savings are not resulting in lower out-of-pocket (OOP) costs for patients, according to a recent study.
Pipelines and Preparation: How the US Can Prepare for More RA Biosimilars
April 16th 2023What can practices do to prepare for all the biosimilars to treat rheumatoid arthritis (RA) coming down the pipeline? And how can they ensure that the lower-than-anticipated adoption rates for infliximab biosimilars are not repeated? Robert Zutaut, RPh, from McKesson Provider Solutions, tackles all this and more on this episode of Not So Different.
The Role of Biosimilars: Advancing Access, Financial Health, and System Sustainability
March 11th 2024Kashyap Patel, MD, CEO of Carolina Blood and Cancer Care, a member of the Community Oncology Alliance, and member of The Center for Biosimilars® Advisory Board, glances back at the development of the biosimilar industry and the last 5 years of progress.