Author
Listed:
- Ameet Sarpatwari
(Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School)
- Joshua J. Gagne
(Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School)
- Nicole L. Levidow
(Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School)
- Aaron S. Kesselheim
(Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School)
Abstract
As lower-cost versions of original biologic drugs made by different manufacturers, follow-on biologics offer the promise of meaningful savings for the US health care system and improved patient health outcomes through greater medication adherence. Fulfillment of this promise, however, is predicated on the prescribing of such products. Under state drug product selection laws, pharmacists may substitute prescriptions for brand name, small-molecule drugs with their generic equivalents, but will be indefinitely prohibited from substituting prescriptions for original biologics with their follow-on biologic counterparts given a lack of product-specific guidance on demonstrating interchangeability. Even when interchangeable follow-on biologics become available, they will face heightened barriers to substitution following the enactment of so-called carve-outs in several states. Data collected to date suggest that a substantial proportion of US physicians remain skeptical of follow-on biologics despite their long record of safe and effective use in Europe. Active surveillance of follow-on biologics within the US market using insurance claims databases can help address this skepticism and help answer key questions concerning the safety of switching between original and follow-on products or between different follow-on products, and of extrapolating to broader indications. Funding is needed to support such surveillance activities and to disseminate the findings to key stakeholders.
Suggested Citation
Ameet Sarpatwari & Joshua J. Gagne & Nicole L. Levidow & Aaron S. Kesselheim, 2017.
"Active Surveillance of Follow-on Biologics: A Prescription for Uptake,"
Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 105-108, February.
Handle:
RePEc:spr:drugsa:v:40:y:2017:i:2:d:10.1007_s40264-016-0471-4
DOI: 10.1007/s40264-016-0471-4
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:drugsa:v:40:y:2017:i:2:d:10.1007_s40264-016-0471-4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/40264 .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.