Medical specialists' attitudes to prescribing biosimilars (original) (raw)
Related papers
Awareness, Knowledge, and Perceptions of Biosimilars Among Specialty Physicians
Advances in therapy, 2017
The Biosimilars Forum conducted a survey through an independent organization from November 20, 2015 to January 4, 2016 in order to assess current levels of awareness, knowledge, and perceptions of biosimilars among US specialty physicians who already prescribe biologics. The survey was intended to provide a baseline level of knowledge about biosimilars and will be repeated in 2-3 years in order to monitor trends over time. A 19-question survey was created by the Biosimilars Forum and was administered by an independent third party. Responses were obtained from 1201 US physicians across specialties that are high prescribers of biologics, including dermatologists, gastroenterologists, hematologist-oncologists, medical oncologists, nephrologists, and rheumatologists. The results of this survey highlight a significant need for evidence-based education about biosimilars for physicians across specialties. Five major knowledge gaps were identified: defining biologics, biosimilars, and biosi...
Patient attitudes and understanding about biosimilars: an international cross-sectional survey
Patient Preference and Adherence, 2016
Objective: To understand the levels of awareness, usage, and knowledge of biosimilars among patients, caregivers, and the general population in the US and the European Union; perceptions of biosimilars compared to originator biologics; perceived benefits and drawbacks of clinical trials; and whether advocacy groups impact patients' willingness to try a biosimilar. Methods: An international survey was conducted which contained up to 56 closed-ended (requiring yes/no or ranking answers) and open-ended questions, depending on the population assigned. The survey was divided into distinct sections, including medication-class awareness, usage, and knowledge about biologic and biosimilar therapies; perceptions of clinical trials; and involvement in advocacy groups. Interviews were conducted in adults categorized as: 1) diagnosed: patients with inflammatory bowel disease including Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis, rheumatoid arthritis, psoriasis, breast cancer, lung cancer, colorectal cancer, or non-Hodgkin's lymphoma; 2) diagnosed advocacy: individuals with these diseases who participated in patient support groups; 3) caregiver: has a loved one with these conditions and is involved in medical decisions; 4) general population: aged 18-64 years, without these conditions. Statistical analyses among groups within a region (US or EU) used column proportions test with a 95% confidence interval. Results: In all, 3,198 individuals responded. Awareness about biologic therapies was significantly higher in diagnosed, diagnosed advocacy, and caregiver groups (45%-78%) versus general population (27%; P,0.05). Across all groups, awareness of biosimilars was low; only 6% of the general population reported at least a general impression of biosimilars. Awareness was significantly higher in the diagnosed advocacy group (20%-30%; P,0.05). Gaps in knowledge about biosimilars included safety, efficacy, and access to these agents. Respondents had generally positive perceptions of clinical trials, although barriers to participation were identified. Conclusion: An immediate need exists for patient education about biosimilars and clinical trials to ensure educated and informed decisions are made about biosimilar use.
Clinical and Regulatory Concerns of Biosimilars: A Review of Literature
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
Although biosimilars have been part of clinical practice for more than a decade, healthcare professionals (HCPs) do not fully accept them. This is because of the perception that biosimilars may not be like their originators in terms of quality, safety, and efficacy. This study aims to evaluate the current knowledge and attitudes of healthcare professionals toward biosimilar prescription, and to elaborate on their concerns. We reviewed the literature using PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Science Direct electronic databases in the period from 2018 to 2020. The knowledge and confidence of healthcare professionals vary between countries, between clinical profiles and between studies. Although most of the healthcare professionals had a positive attitude to prescribing biosimilars, they would still prefer to prescribe them in initial treatment. Generally, HCPs were against multiple switches and substitution of biosimilars at the pharmacy level. HCP’s key concern was interchangeability, with...
Patient state of knowledge on biosimilars – do physicians need to improve education skills?
Romanian Journal of Rheumatology, 2020
Availability of biosimilar medicines is rapidly increasing, potentially leading to a wider prescription and a support for healthcare system costs. Despite efforts of patient and physician educational initiatives there still remains a reluctance in prescribing or administering this type of products. A multi-centric survey was conducted on 336 patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), spondyloarthritis (SpA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA) or lupus (SLE) on biologic treatment. Half of the patients stated never hearing of biosimilars and one third feared adverse events (infections, cancer). Another 20% felt insecure on drug tolerability or efficacy. However, the majority declared relying on their rheumatologist if prescribing a biosimilar. Lack of patient information should be accurately addressed by health organizations so that the choice of treatment is done knowingly.
Attitudes towards subsequent entry biologics/biosimilars: A survey of Canadian rheumatologists
Clinical Rheumatology, 2015
Globally, patents on several well established biologic agents used to treat rheumatic diseases have already or will expire over the next few years, allowing for the availability of subsequent entry biologics (SEBs or biosimilars). The objective of this study was to identify gaps in knowledge and attitudes towards SEBs among Canadian rheumatologists. Eighty-one rheumatologists completed the survey and were included in the analysis (22 % of the 369 who were contacted). We found that one third of physicians (31 %) were familiar with SEBs and that physicians with greater than 20 years of practice were significantly more likely to be familiar or very familiar with SEBs compared to respondents with less than 10 years or 10-20 years of experience (OR 11.1, 95 % CI: 2.1-55.5, p=0.004 and OR 4.5, 95 % CI: 1.2-16.2, p=0.023, respectively). A third (32 %) of physicians agreed or strongly agreed that they would be comfortable with indication extrapolation. Most respondents (88 %) would feel concerned or very concerned if a pharmacist had the ability to substitute a biologic drug for an SEB without the physician's approval. This survey was the first study that evaluated the position of rheumatologists on key areas surrounding SEBs from a nationwide Canadian perspective. Current physician attitudes and perceptions of SEBs can inform future educational initiatives and highlight important issues for payers, policy makers, and other stakeholders.
Translational Lung Cancer Research, 2020
Biologic agents have revolutionized the management of serious health conditions in the last two decades. The use of "targeted therapy" brings not only better progression free survivals and overall survivals, but also better toxicity profiles and quality of life benefits, compared to empirical palliative chemotherapy. However, given the high cost associated with biologic drugs and the sharp increases in biologic drug utilization, this drug category has significantly raised healthcare cost over the years. A similar phenomenon was previously experienced with branded simple chemical compound drugs, including chemotherapeutic agents, which was largely mitigated by the introduction of a generic approval pathway, decreasing the costs of the drugs, making them more affordable, given to the increase in competition among the drug makers. A similar opportunity presents years later with the completion of the full patent exclusivity period of many biologics. However, the ending of patent exclusivity, although enables more market competition, does not guarantee market penetration. Stakeholders, such as patients, providers and payers, must build trust and confidence in the science of biosimilars and the product specific studies leading to FDA approval in order to incorporate these products to practice and enable the biosimilar market at large to reach the potential to significantly contribute to reductions in drug cost. Dissemination of scientific and emerging biosimilar evidence is paramount in order to support stakeholder informed decision making and enable each to benefit from expanded treatment options. This paper describes the biosimilar development, approval process, and reviews a number of challenges with the marketing implementation of biosimilars.
ESMO Open
Biosimilars present a necessary and timely opportunity for physicians, patients and healthcare systems. If suitably developed clinically, manufactured to the correct standards and used appropriately, they can positively impact on the financial sustainability of healthcare systems. A critical consideration regarding the introduction of biosimilars into the clinic centres on the required information concerning all the respective procedures. This position paper aims to describe the issues revolving around biosimilars that are relevant to the field of oncology, especially the prescribers. More specifically, we discuss aspects related to definition, forms of biosimilars, labelling, extrapolation, interchangeability, switching, automatic substitution, clinical standards on safety and efficacy, responsibilities among prescribers and pharmacists, potential impact on financial burden in healthcare and the current scenario and future prospects of biosimilars in Europe and the rest of the world.
Journal of Crohn's & colitis, 2017
The aim of this survey was to find out the patients' perspectives concerning biosimilars. An online survey consisting of 14 questions was made available between November 2014 and October 2015. Only respondents who had heard of biosimilars were asked to respond the final twelve questions. A total of 1181 patients responded. Of these, 38% had heard of biosimilars. The respondents worried about biosimilars' safety profile [47.0%], efficacy [40.3%], and molecular basis [35.0%]. Only 25.2% of the respondents had no concerns about biosimilars. Just over half [55.9%] of the respondents thought that the lower cost of the biosimilars should not come before their safety and efficacy. Only 12.5% of respondents felt that extrapolation made sense. The survey showed that 39.9% felt that patients should be systematically informed, and 26.7% felt that patient associations should be informed and able to give their opinions. It also revealed that 20.9% of the respondents would be against the ...
BioDrugs
Introduction There has been a significant increase in the volume of biosimilar medicines recently due to the expiries of patent protections of biologic medicines. Biosimilars are considered new medicines, and their usage in therapy is often associated with uncertainty from the perspectives of physicians, pharmacists and patients. Objectives The purpose of this study was to identify hospital pharmacist opinions towards these new medicines and investigate their usage in practice. Methods A paper-based, self-administered questionnaire was distributed to Polish hospital pharmacists. Results Biosimilars were used in 77% of surveyed hospitals, whereas originator biologics were utilised within 90% of settings. The former medicines were found to consist of less than one-third of the entire course of biological pharmacotherapy used within Polish hospitals. A total of 88% of hospital pharmacists were concerned that the new drugs were not identical with the biologic versions, 48% with their immunogenicity and 44% with other pharmacokinetic properties. The majority of respondents (87%) stated that the most important advantage of biosimilars related to decreased costs. Furthermore, according to participants, pharmacist-led substitution is not appropriate. Conclusion Due to the numerous concerns relating to the usage of biosimilars, their introduction into patient therapy requires special attention from healthcare providers. While pharmacists involved in the distribution of biosimilars are conscious of their impact in decreasing costs of therapy, they do not feel comfortable in recommending their substitution without a physician's permission. There is a need for more precise legal regulations relating to biosimilars, improved communication between physicians and pharmacists, as well as educational initiatives to improve the safe and effective usage of biosimilars.
The Knowledge, Opinions, Attitudes of Physicians About Biosimilar Drugs: A University Hospital Data
Journal of basic and clinical health sciences, 2022
To evaluate the knowledge, opinions and prescribing attitudes of physicians working in an university hospital about biosimilar drugs and analyse the factors affect these parameters. Methods: In this descriptive, cross-sectional study, data was collected using a questionnaire consisting of 5 sections and 41 questions evaluating the knowledge, opinions and prescribing attitudes of physicians about biosimilar drugs. Descriptive statistics was used to report the findings; relationship between dependent and independent variables were examined using the t-test for parametric data, and Mann Whitney U and Kruskall Wallis analysis for nonparametric data. P <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: Questionnaire response rate was 61.9% (n=114). Physicians mean knowledge score about biosimilar drugs was 7.6 ± 2.5 out of 14 points. Have heard the concept the biosimilar drug, had training towards biosimilar drugs and high academic level were increased the mean knowledge score. Of the respondents, 45.2% of the physicians stated that biosimilar drugs are not as effective as biological reference drugs, and 35.9% thought that they aren't safe. More than half of the physicians (56.6%) stated that they did not hesitate to prescribe biosimilar drugs. Conclusions: Physicians' general knowledge level on biosimilar drugs was low and they had doubts about the efficacy and safety of biosimilar drugs. This might be related with lack of knowledge. Therefore structured training programmes related in this area, might increase the knowledge level and might positively affect physicians' opinions and attitudes on biosimilar drugs