Richard G. Frank, PhD, a health economist at Harvard Medical School and the former deputy assistant secretary for planning and evaluation at HHS, has penned a new perspective paper in the New England Journal of Medicine in which he warns that, if biosimilars continue their trajectory, they could fail to deliver on their promise to provide cost savings to the US health system.
Richard G. Frank, PhD, a health economist at Harvard Medical School and the former deputy assistant secretary for planning and evaluation at HHS, has penned a new perspective paper in the New England Journal of Medicine in which he warns that, if biosimilars continue their trajectory, they could fail to deliver on their promise to provide cost savings to the US health system.
Frank points out that only an estimated $3.2 billion (3%) of US biologic drug spending is currently subject to competition from biosimilars. That is a disappointing figure given that spending on biologic drugs has been averaging a 10% annual increase recently.
So what’s holding biosimilars back? Frank says that physicians are “naturally hesitant” to prescribe biosimilars because they lack familiarity with these products, “especially given that regulations create the impression that a biosimilar may not be all that similar to its originator.” The FDA’s use of 4-letter suffixes appended to the names of biosimilars may give prescribers the undue impression that the clinical effects of a biosimilar could have a meaningful difference from those of the reference drug, and “Perceived differences between competing products weaken price competition.” Frank suggests that an alternative tracking method could include use of the biosimilar’s brand name for pharmacovigilance efforts.
Like many other stakeholders, Frank has concerns about interchangeability designations for biosimilars. Because pharmacy-level substitution hinges upon a designation of interchangeability—which has not yet been granted to any product by the FDA—the cost savings that could be produced by this practice are yet to become a reality.
Furthermore, the FDA has not yet finalized its guidance on demonstrating interchangeability. Says Frank, “…the FDA requires that equivalent clinical results occur within the same patient if the biosimilar replaces the reference product. The FDA has not been clear about whether this requirement involves meeting an additional standard or producing more data. Conducting extra clinical studies is a very expensive activity, so clarity on this point is important.”
Other factors hindering biosimilar uptake, says Frank, include the fact that Medicare’s reimbursement policies for these products are “at best neutral with respect to choice of product on the basis of price,” rather than actively promoting price competition. Furthermore, reference product sponsors’ secrecy about manufacturing processes adds an additional hurdle in bringing biosimilars to the marketplace.
“Although a number of these factors may separately have modest effects, together they are additive and most likely contribute to the slow development of competition in the biologics market,” says Frank. “If the impediments continue, important savings will probably be left on the table.”
Reference
Frank RG. Friction in the path to use of biosimilar drugs [published online February 28, 2018]. N Engl J Med. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1714908.
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.
Webinar Addresses Solutions to Improve Adalimumab Biosimilar Uptake
March 18th 2024Government policies, including those related to prescribing incentives and interchangeability, need to be reworked to encourage biosimilar adoption and create meaningful savings for health systems, according to speakers at a recent webinar.
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.
BioRationality: EMA Announces Readiness to Waive Comparative Efficacy Studies of Biosimilars
March 4th 2024Sarfaraz K. Niazi, PhD, takes a look at the European Medicines Agency's (EMA) announcement that it will investigate whether comparative efficacy tests should be needed for a biosimilar to receive regulatory approval.