- Bone Health
- Immunology
- Hematology
- Respiratory
- Dermatology
- Diabetes
- Gastroenterology
- Neurology
- Oncology
- Ophthalmology
- Rare Disease
- Rheumatology
Survey: Canadian Physicians Support Distinguishable Names for Biologics, Biosimilars
Results of a new national survey conducted by the Alliance for Safe Biologic Medicines (ASBM) shows that Canadian physicians support the use of distinguishable names for biologic therapies, including biosimilars,
Results of a new national survey conducted by the Alliance for Safe Biologic Medicines (ASBM) show that Canadian physicians support the use of distinguishable names for biologic therapies, including biosimilars, and that these physicians are open to using biosimilars for non-medical reasons so long as they retain control over the decision to switch a patient’s treatment.
The results of the survey were recently presented at the Drug Information Association Annual Canadian meeting in Ottawa by ASBM's past chairman, Harry Gewanter, MD.
"Distinguishable non-proprietary naming for all biologic medicines is important for the appropriate use of originator biologics and biosimilars, as well as pharmacovigilance," said Gewanter in a statement. "Further, Canadian physicians believe it is critical that the physician-patient relationship remains central when deciding which treatments their patients will utilize."
The survey found the following:
- 68% of physicians support Health Canada’s implementation of distinguishable names for biologics, though debate continues over how best to name these products.
- 54% believe that a biosimilar that shares an international nonproprietary name with its reference product implies that the 2 molecules are identical, which is counter to the principle of biosimilarity.
- 63% believe that a biosimilar that shares an international nonproprietary name with its reference product implies that the 2 therapies are approved for the same indications, which may or may not be the case, depending upon the drug.
"The results of our survey provide important insight and evidence to regulators and policymakers on the perspectives of Canadian prescribers of biologic medicines," said Michael Reilly, executive director of ASBM. "For originator biologics and biosimilars to be used successfully, decision makers should rely on the input and opinions of those who prescribe them, working collaboratively to develop policies that minimize potential safety or efficacy issues."
Will the FTC Be More PBM-Friendly Under a Second Trump Administration?
February 23rd 2025On this episode of Not So Different, we explore the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) second interim report on pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) with Joe Wisniewski from Turquoise Health, discussing key issues like preferential reimbursement, drug pricing transparency, biosimilars, shifting regulations, and how a second Trump administration could reshape PBM practices.
Biosimilar Approvals Streamlined With Advanced Statistics Amidst Differing Regulatory Requirements
February 25th 2025The FDA and European Medicines Agency (EMA) mandate high similarity between biosimilars and reference products, but their regulatory processes differ, especially with multiple reference products.
Biosimilars Policy Roundup for September 2024—Podcast Edition
October 6th 2024On this episode of Not So Different, we discuss the FDA's approval of a new biosimilar for treating retinal conditions, which took place in September 2024 alongside other major industry developments, including ongoing legal disputes and broader trends in market dynamics and regulatory challenges.
FDA, EMA Approve Second Pair of Denosumab Biosimilars
February 17th 2025The FDA and European Medicines Agency (EMA) granted approval, with interchangeability in the US, to Samsung Bioepis' denosumab biosimilars, which will be marketed under different names depending on whether they will be used to treat osteoporosis or bone metastases.
