Advanced

Uptake of rheumatology biosimilars in the absence of forced switching

Di Giuseppe, Daniela ; Frisell, Thomas ; Ernestam, Sofia ; Forsblad-D’Elia, Helena ; Lindqvist, Elisabet LU ; Lindström, Ulf ; Sjöwall, Christopher and Askling, Johan (2018) In Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy 18(5). p.499-504
Abstract

Background: To describe the uptake and system-level effects of the introduction of biosimilars in a setting without forced switching. Research design and methods: We used data from the Swedish Rheumatology Quality register from start of marketing of infliximab (Remsima® and Inflectra®) and etanercept (Benepali®) biosimilars until 31 December 2016. We compared users of each originator-product and its biosimilar(s) by line of treatment: bDMARD-naïve patients, non-medical switchers (vs. matched patients remaining on originator), and patients switching from a previous bDMARD of another type. Results: From the start of marketing 1343 patients started an infliximab biosimilar (22 months) and 2691 started etanercept (9 months). Overall, the... (More)

Background: To describe the uptake and system-level effects of the introduction of biosimilars in a setting without forced switching. Research design and methods: We used data from the Swedish Rheumatology Quality register from start of marketing of infliximab (Remsima® and Inflectra®) and etanercept (Benepali®) biosimilars until 31 December 2016. We compared users of each originator-product and its biosimilar(s) by line of treatment: bDMARD-naïve patients, non-medical switchers (vs. matched patients remaining on originator), and patients switching from a previous bDMARD of another type. Results: From the start of marketing 1343 patients started an infliximab biosimilar (22 months) and 2691 started etanercept (9 months). Overall, the introduction of these biosimilars resulted in an increase of the total number of ongoing infliximab and etanercept treatments (originator + biosimilar) . At the end of the study period, biosimilars accounted for 31% of all infliximab treatments and 31% of all etanercept-treated patients. For each line of therapy, we noted only small differences in patient characteristics between those starting the originator product vs. its biosimilar(s). Conclusions: Introduction of biosimilars have effects beyond replacement of the originator product, in terms of an increased rate of bDMARD initiation. Selection to non-medical switching displayed no particular disease- or patient-characteristics.

(Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
bDMARD, biosimilar, rheumatology, uptake
in
Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy
volume
18
issue
5
pages
499 - 504
publisher
Ashley Publications
external identifiers
  • pmid:29633865
  • scopus:85045151363
ISSN
1471-2598
DOI
10.1080/14712598.2018.1458089
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
56160b18-9f12-4215-9274-0bf00047ee48
date added to LUP
2018-04-17 14:47:51
date last changed
2019-12-04 07:08:52
@article{56160b18-9f12-4215-9274-0bf00047ee48,
  abstract     = {<p>Background: To describe the uptake and system-level effects of the introduction of biosimilars in a setting without forced switching. Research design and methods: We used data from the Swedish Rheumatology Quality register from start of marketing of infliximab (Remsima® and Inflectra®) and etanercept (Benepali®) biosimilars until 31 December 2016. We compared users of each originator-product and its biosimilar(s) by line of treatment: bDMARD-naïve patients, non-medical switchers (vs. matched patients remaining on originator), and patients switching from a previous bDMARD of another type. Results: From the start of marketing 1343 patients started an infliximab biosimilar (22 months) and 2691 started etanercept (9 months). Overall, the introduction of these biosimilars resulted in an increase of the total number of ongoing infliximab and etanercept treatments (originator + biosimilar) . At the end of the study period, biosimilars accounted for 31% of all infliximab treatments and 31% of all etanercept-treated patients. For each line of therapy, we noted only small differences in patient characteristics between those starting the originator product vs. its biosimilar(s). Conclusions: Introduction of biosimilars have effects beyond replacement of the originator product, in terms of an increased rate of bDMARD initiation. Selection to non-medical switching displayed no particular disease- or patient-characteristics.</p>},
  author       = {Di Giuseppe, Daniela and Frisell, Thomas and Ernestam, Sofia and Forsblad-D’Elia, Helena and Lindqvist, Elisabet and Lindström, Ulf and Sjöwall, Christopher and Askling, Johan},
  issn         = {1471-2598},
  language     = {eng},
  month        = {05},
  number       = {5},
  pages        = {499--504},
  publisher    = {Ashley Publications},
  series       = {Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy},
  title        = {Uptake of rheumatology biosimilars in the absence of forced switching},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14712598.2018.1458089},
  doi          = {10.1080/14712598.2018.1458089},
  volume       = {18},
  year         = {2018},
}