Europe has several lessons for the US biosimilar market, according to a pharmaceutical executive who spoke during ISPOR 2019.
Europe has several lessons for the US biosimilar market, according to a pharmaceutical executive who spoke during ISPOR 2019.
“You need to have a balance so that there is sustainability in the marketplace,” said Chad Pettit, the executive director of Global Value Access and Policy for Amgen’s Biosimilars Business Unit.
Asked to elaborate in an interview with The Center for Biosimilars® after the panel discussion about biosimilars, he indicated that he meant the different systems that European governments have for reimbursement.
The United Kingdom, for example, has a multi-winner tender system, but other countries, he said, have what he called more extreme procurement mechanisms, such as single tender, winner-take-all systems. Particularly in smaller companies, procurement is “extreme,” he said.
“A single tender procurement mechanism really creates an unbalanced end result,” he said, “creating short-term wins for the country but it’s probably not a long-term win.”
In the United States, CMS set what he called a level playing field for Medicare Part B, but he was more critical of CMS’s decision to reimburse biosimilars differently in the 340B program for hospitals. “We think that that is a distortion of the marketplace and in the long run is not going to benefit the marketplace overall," he said.
During the panel at ISPOR, participants spoke about the need for continued education of physicians and patients. Pettit said overall Amgen was pleased with the FDA’s educational efforts so far, and said all groups play a role, including physician groups, patients groups, medical societies, pharmacists, health plans, and manufacturers. But ultimately, it is the FDA that possesses most of the influence, he said.
Amgen believes that 3 pieces are needed for a long-term market: scientifically appropriate regulatory standards, a level playing field, and scientifically accurate educational outreach.
Asked about the beliefs of different patient groups, with some more in favor of biosimilars than others, Pettit said that gets back to the need for scientifically accurate education. Noting that different groups have different levels of confidence, some might ask questions relating to development, supply, manufacturing, the approval process for prescribing, extrapolation, switching studies between an originator product and its reference product, the difference between a product approved as a biosimilar and a product approved as an interchangeable biosimilar, and pharmacovigilance.
The FDA final rule on interchangeability “gives us certainty on our development programs," he said. "It allows us to have a clear view as we think about development of biosimilar medicines.”
During the panel, he mentioned the cost savings that biosimilars are expected to provide, citing an IQVIA report that said biosimilars saved $7 billion this year and predicts that further use will generate $60 billion in savings by 2023. Those savings "are evidence that the system is working," he said afterwards.
Pettit appeared on the panel with Ha Kung Wong, JD, MBA, a patent attorney with Venable Fitzpatrick, who provided an overview of the post grant review (PGR) and inter partes (IPR) review procedures, which are used for challenging the validity of patents at the patent office, as opposed to more expensive district court litigation.
BioRationality: Withdrawal of Proposed Terminal Disclaimer Rule Spells Major Setback for Biosimilars
December 10th 2024The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)’s withdrawal of its proposed terminal disclaimer rule is seen as a setback for biosimilar developers, as it preserves patent prosecution practices that favor originator companies and increases costs for biosimilar competition, according to Sarfaraz K. Niazi, PhD.
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.
Commercial Payer Coverage of Biosimilars: Market Share, Pricing, and Policy Shifts
December 4th 2024Researchers observe significant shifts in payer preferences for originator vs biosimilar products from 2017 to 2022, revealing growing payer interest in multiple product options, alongside the increasing market share of biosimilars, which contributed to notable reductions in both average sales prices and wholesale acquisition costs.
Denosumab Biosimilars Earn Positive CHMP Opinion for Bone Loss and Giant Cell Tumor of Bone
November 26th 2024The European Medicines Agency Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) has issued a positive opinion for the denosumab biosimilars SB16 for all indications referencing Prolia and Xgeva.
The Rebate War: How Originator Companies Are Fighting Back Against Biosimilars
November 25th 2024Few biologics in the US have multiple biosimilar competitors, but originator biologics respond quickly to competition by increasing rebates and lowering net prices, despite short approval-to-launch timelines for biosimilars.