IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharme/v35y2017i10d10.1007_s40273-017-0529-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing the Value of Biosimilars: A Review of the Role of Budget Impact Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Steven Simoens

    (KU Leuven)

  • Ira Jacobs

    (Pfizer Inc.)

  • Robert Popovian

    (Pfizer Inc.)

  • Leah Isakov

    (Pfizer Inc.)

  • Lesley G. Shane

    (Pfizer Inc.)

Abstract

Biosimilar drugs are highly similar to an originator (reference) biologic, with no clinically meaningful differences in terms of safety or efficacy. As biosimilars offer the potential for lower acquisition costs versus the originator biologic, evaluating the economic implications of the introduction of biosimilars is of interest. Budget impact analysis (BIA) is a commonly used methodology. This review of published BIAs of biosimilar fusion proteins and/or monoclonal antibodies identified 12 unique publications (three full papers and nine congress posters). When evaluated alongside professional guidance on conducting BIA, the majority of BIAs identified were generally in line with international recommendations. However, a lack of peer-reviewed journal articles and considerable shortcomings in the publications were identified. Deficiencies included a limited range of cost parameters, a reliance on assumptions for parameters such as uptake and drug pricing, a lack of expert validation, and a limited range of sensitivity analyses that were based on arbitrary ranges. The rationale for the methods employed, limitations of the BIA approach, and instructions for local adaptation often were inadequately discussed. To understand fully the potential economic impact and value of biosimilars, the impact of biosimilar supply, manufacturer-provided supporting services, and price competition should be included in BIAs. Alternative approaches, such as cost minimization, which requires evidence demonstrating similarity to the originator biologic, and those that integrate a range of economic assessment methods, are needed to assess the value of biosimilars.

Suggested Citation

  • Steven Simoens & Ira Jacobs & Robert Popovian & Leah Isakov & Lesley G. Shane, 2017. "Assessing the Value of Biosimilars: A Review of the Role of Budget Impact Analysis," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 35(10), pages 1047-1062, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:35:y:2017:i:10:d:10.1007_s40273-017-0529-x
    DOI: 10.1007/s40273-017-0529-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40273-017-0529-x
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40273-017-0529-x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jorge Mestre-Ferrandiz & Adrian Towse & Mikel Berdud, 2016. "Biosimilars: How Can Payers Get Long-Term Savings?," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 34(6), pages 609-616, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. François Bocquet & Anaïs Loubière & Isabelle Fusier & Anne-Laure Cordonnier & Pascal Paubel, 2016. "Competition Between Biosimilars and Patented Biologics: Learning from European and Japanese Experience," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 34(11), pages 1173-1186, November.
    2. Toon van der Gronde & Carin A Uyl-de Groot & Toine Pieters, 2017. "Addressing the challenge of high-priced prescription drugs in the era of precision medicine: A systematic review of drug life cycles, therapeutic drug markets and regulatory frameworks," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(8), pages 1-34, August.
    3. Sabine Vogler & Valérie Paris & Alessandra Ferrario & Veronika J. Wirtz & Kees Joncheere & Peter Schneider & Hanne Bak Pedersen & Guillaume Dedet & Zaheer-Ud-Din Babar, 2017. "How Can Pricing and Reimbursement Policies Improve Affordable Access to Medicines? Lessons Learned from European Countries," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 307-321, June.
    4. Hye-Jae Lee & Euna Han & Hyero Kim, 2020. "Comparison of Utilization Trends between Biosimilars and Generics: Lessons from the Nationwide Claims Data in South Korea," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 557-566, August.
    5. Katharina E. Blankart & Friederike Arndt, 2020. "Physician-Level Cost Control Measures and Regional Variation of Biosimilar Utilization in Germany," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-14, June.
    6. Jaime Espin & Michael Schlander & Brian Godman & Pippa Anderson & Jorge Mestre-Ferrandiz & Isabelle Borget & Adam Hutchings & Steven Flostrand & Adam Parnaby & Claudio Jommi, 2018. "Projecting Pharmaceutical Expenditure in EU5 to 2021: Adjusting for the Impact of Discounts and Rebates," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 16(6), pages 803-817, December.
    7. Ghyli Kirshner & Peter Makai & Chiara Brouns & Lonneke Timmers & Ron Kemp, 2024. "The impact of an ‘evergreening’ strategy nearing patent expiration on the uptake of biosimilars and public healthcare costs: a case study on the introduction of a second administration form of trastuz," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 25(7), pages 1147-1163, September.
    8. Don Husereau & Brian Feagan & Carl Selya-Hammer, 2018. "Policy Options for Infliximab Biosimilars in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Given Emerging Evidence for Switching," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 279-288, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:pharme:v:35:y:2017:i:10:d:10.1007_s40273-017-0529-x. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.