The substitution program was carried out in 2020 and yielded savings of $4 million in 1 month, investigators reported at ASCO 2021.
An experiment with automatic prescribing of biosimilars at Texas Oncology resulted in a dramatic savings and increase in biosimilar vs originator usage rates, investigators reported at ASCO 2021.
Texas Oncology is a network of approximately 460 physicians and oncologists who serve patients with cancer in rural and urban communities throughout Texas.
A central pharmacy team reviewed all prescriptions and substituted biosimilars for originator biologics, unless payers insisted otherwise or the relevant biosimilar was not in the practice formulary. Texas Oncology also compiled a weekly report identifying all patients who would benefit from switching to biosimilars, and substitutions were then made. In collaboration with McKesson Specialty Health, patient and clinician education was incorporated into the biosimilar usage effort to improve results.
Texas Oncology began the substitution in July 2020 with rituximab and followed up in September 2020 and October 2020 with bevacizumab and trastuzumab substitutions, respectively. By December 2020, utilization of biosimilars rose to 80% from 5% for rituximab, 88% from 9% for bevacizumab, and 74% from 8% for trastuzumab.
Investigators calculated the potential savings per administration at $550 for bevacizumab, $850 for trastuzumab, and $1400 for rituximab. “In 1 month alone, this project dramatically reduced cost by $4 million or 21% by conversion to these 3 biosimilars,” they wrote.
The investigators also predicted that additional savings would be possible by using multidose vials of biosimilar product rather than single-dose vials.
“Our comprehensive team approach successfully deploys therapeutic interchange of biosimilars for brand drugs in a community oncology practice which leads to substantial cost savings. This has real implications in controlling the total cost of care,” the authors of the study wrote.
Reference
Wilfong L, Dave N, Garey JS, et al. A successful model of biosimilar adoption in a community oncology practice. Presented at: ASCO 2021: June 3-7, 2021. Abstract 6514.
Overcoming Challenges to Improve Access and Reduce Costs
November 12th 2024Biosimilars hold the potential to dramatically lower health care costs and improve access to life-changing treatments, but realizing this potential will require urgent policy reforms, market competition, and better education for both providers and patients.
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.
Challenges, Obstacles, and Future Directions for Anti-TNF Biosimilars in IBD
November 9th 2024A review article on tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α inhibitors in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) outlined current use of anti-TNF originators and biosimilars, their efficacy and safety, the benefits and challenges of biosimilars, and the future of biosimilars in IBD.
Eye on Pharma: Henlius, Organon Updates; Meitheal Portfolio Expansion; Celltrion Zymfentra Data
November 5th 2024Henlius and Organon’s pertuzumab biosimilar met phase 3 goals; Meitheal expanded its US biosimilars; Celltrion’s subcutaneous infliximab (Zymfentra) showed monotherapy could be as effective as combination therapy for inflammatory bowel disease.
BioRationality: Should mRNA Copies Be Filed as NDAs or Biosimilars?
November 4th 2024The article by Sarfaraz K. Niazi, PhD, argues that the FDA’s classification of future copies of messenger RNA (mRNA) products could be reconsidered, suggesting they might be eligible for new drug applications (NDAs) or a hybrid biosimilar category due to their unique characteristics and increasing prevalence.