A real-world study helped show how pegfilgrastim biosimilar can improve savings in the Oncology Care Model and its successor, the Oncology Care First Model, according to findings presented at ASCO20 Virtual, the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.
A real-world study of patients with breast cancer who received febrile neutropenia prophylaxis with biosimilar pegfilgrastim (Udenyca) or reference pegfilgrastim (Neulasta) has not only demonstrated comparable efficacy between the 2 products but also shown that large-scale comparisons of this nature can be done, according to a study presented at ASCO20 Virtual, the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.
Investigators said the study was driven in part by the ongoing efforts by CMS to spur advances in value-based care, particularly through the Oncology Care Model (OCM) and its follow-on, the Oncology Care First Model.
“We have learned through the [OCM] that there are savings to be found by reducing inpatient admissions and emergency department visits and controlling for things such as duplicate [laboratory tests]. However, it has become increasingly clear that further savings will require practices to evaluate their use of both cancer-directed therapy and supportive therapy,” they wrote.
Pegfilgrastim is typically used to stem the incidence of neutropenia, which is a common adverse event for patients undergoing chemotherapy. Pegfilgrastim expense amounts to 5.3% of the total cost of cancer care in the OCM, so trimming this expense via use of biosimilars has great potential for savings.
Study Design
Investigators used the Integra Connect Value Monitor to perform the comparative effectiveness research at scale. This enabled them to perform a matched cohort analysis of patients with breast cancer receiving biosimilar vs reference forms of pegfilgrastim between January 1, 2017, and August 31, 2019. Patients were matched according to age, gender, OCM participation status, and date of treatment. Each biosimilar patient (n = 496) was matched to 5 Neulasta patients.
The rate of neutropenia was the efficacy end point, and neutropenia was defined as patients having an absolute neutrophil count (ANC) less than 1500 or the presence of an ICD-10 code to classify neutropenia in the patient’s medical record.
The rates of neutropenia demonstrated by the biosimilar and reference product were similar at 28.6% and 29.1%, respectively (P = .82).
“These rates are likely higher than those reported in the literature due to the very broad definition of neutropenia used in this study. Follow up will include neutropenia rates by grade,” including grade IV neutropenia (ANC < 500), investigators said.
In an additional study presented at this year’s ASCO meeting, investigators said that use of biosimilar pegfilgrastim in the OCM enabled them to reverse the upward trend in the cost of pegfilgrastim use. The rate was increasing at $292 per year and the biosimilar use from mid-2018 until mid-2019 contributed to a cost decline of $93 over the first year.
For more biosimilar news from ASCO20 Virtual, click here.
Reference
Webster J, Scott JA, Smith H. Udenyca has equivalent efficacy to the pegfilgrastim originator in breast cancer patients receiving highly myelosuppressive chemotherapy. Presented at: ASCO20 Virtual; May 30-31, 2020. Abstract e19273. meetinglibrary.asco.org/record/190539/abstract
Similar Survival, Safety for Bevacizumab Biosimilar vs Originator in Colorectal Cancer
February 8th 2025A retrospective observational study found no significant differences in progression-free survival or safety in patients with colorectal cancers in Japan treated with ABP 215, Amgen’s bevacizumab biosimilar, or reference bevacizumab (Avastin), and estimated cost savings of 800,000 Japanese yen (approximately $5100) per patient with the biosimilar.
Biosimilars Oncology Roundup for June 2024—Podcast Edition
July 7th 2024On this episode of Not So Different, we review biosimilar news coming out of June, with clinical trial results from conferences and a study showcasing how to overcome economic and noneconomic barriers to oncology biosimilars.
The Biosimilar Void: 90% of Biologics Coming Off Patent Will Lack Biosimilars
February 5th 2025Of the 118 biologics losing exclusivity over the next decade, only 10% have biosimilars in development, meaning a vast majority of biologics have no pipeline, which limits savings potential for the health care system.
Insights from Festival of Biologics: Dracey Poore Discusses Cardinal Health’s 2024 Biosimilar Report
May 19th 2024The 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.
Biosimilars Drive Cost Savings and Achieve 53% Market Share Across Treatment Areas
January 16th 2025Biosimilar launches achieve a 53% market share and a 53% reduction in average drug costs after 5 years of biosimilar competition, according to Samsung Bioepis’ most recent market report, showcasing notable pricing trends and market share disparities across therapeutic areas.
The Next Frontier: Oncology Biosimilars in 2025 and Beyond
January 13th 2025The US oncology biosimilar market has rapidly evolved since its launch in 2017, driven by steep price discounts, payer adoption, and provider confidence, with an upcoming wave of biosimilars targeting blockbuster biologics promising further market growth, cost savings, and broader patient access.