Cargando…
The Great Debate With IBD Biosimilars: Con: Biosimilars Should Not Be Routinely Used as a First Line Biologic and Not Switched From Reference Biologics
The costs associated with biologic therapy in immune-mediated diseases, including inflammatory bowel disease has steadily increased since their introduction over 2 decades ago. The introduction of biosimilars has the promise of cost savings and putting reimbursement pressure on future market entries...
Autor principal: | |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9802193/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36776671 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/crocol/otab038 |
_version_ | 1784861633288339456 |
---|---|
author | Panaccione, Remo |
author_facet | Panaccione, Remo |
author_sort | Panaccione, Remo |
collection | PubMed |
description | The costs associated with biologic therapy in immune-mediated diseases, including inflammatory bowel disease has steadily increased since their introduction over 2 decades ago. The introduction of biosimilars has the promise of cost savings and putting reimbursement pressure on future market entries. However, the interpretation of evidence to support the use of biosimilars either as first line or as part of a nonmedical switch strategy is not straight forward due to low to very low-quality evidence. In particular, switching to a biosimilar is associated with both clinical, ethical, and possibly medicolegal issues. Due to these factors, solutions to address cost efficiency should involve an open, transparent, and collaborative dialogue among the various stakeholders and if at all possible involve strategies that allow patients to remain on originator biologics. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9802193 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-98021932023-02-10 The Great Debate With IBD Biosimilars: Con: Biosimilars Should Not Be Routinely Used as a First Line Biologic and Not Switched From Reference Biologics Panaccione, Remo Crohns Colitis 360 Invited Review The costs associated with biologic therapy in immune-mediated diseases, including inflammatory bowel disease has steadily increased since their introduction over 2 decades ago. The introduction of biosimilars has the promise of cost savings and putting reimbursement pressure on future market entries. However, the interpretation of evidence to support the use of biosimilars either as first line or as part of a nonmedical switch strategy is not straight forward due to low to very low-quality evidence. In particular, switching to a biosimilar is associated with both clinical, ethical, and possibly medicolegal issues. Due to these factors, solutions to address cost efficiency should involve an open, transparent, and collaborative dialogue among the various stakeholders and if at all possible involve strategies that allow patients to remain on originator biologics. Oxford University Press 2021-06-16 /pmc/articles/PMC9802193/ /pubmed/36776671 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/crocol/otab038 Text en © The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Crohn's & Colitis Foundation. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) ), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com |
spellingShingle | Invited Review Panaccione, Remo The Great Debate With IBD Biosimilars: Con: Biosimilars Should Not Be Routinely Used as a First Line Biologic and Not Switched From Reference Biologics |
title | The Great Debate With IBD Biosimilars: Con: Biosimilars Should Not Be Routinely Used as a First Line Biologic and Not Switched From Reference Biologics |
title_full | The Great Debate With IBD Biosimilars: Con: Biosimilars Should Not Be Routinely Used as a First Line Biologic and Not Switched From Reference Biologics |
title_fullStr | The Great Debate With IBD Biosimilars: Con: Biosimilars Should Not Be Routinely Used as a First Line Biologic and Not Switched From Reference Biologics |
title_full_unstemmed | The Great Debate With IBD Biosimilars: Con: Biosimilars Should Not Be Routinely Used as a First Line Biologic and Not Switched From Reference Biologics |
title_short | The Great Debate With IBD Biosimilars: Con: Biosimilars Should Not Be Routinely Used as a First Line Biologic and Not Switched From Reference Biologics |
title_sort | great debate with ibd biosimilars: con: biosimilars should not be routinely used as a first line biologic and not switched from reference biologics |
topic | Invited Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9802193/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36776671 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/crocol/otab038 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT panaccioneremo thegreatdebatewithibdbiosimilarsconbiosimilarsshouldnotberoutinelyusedasafirstlinebiologicandnotswitchedfromreferencebiologics AT panaccioneremo greatdebatewithibdbiosimilarsconbiosimilarsshouldnotberoutinelyusedasafirstlinebiologicandnotswitchedfromreferencebiologics |