Mark Fendrick, MD, discusses the role that biosimilars will play in value-based insurance design (VBID).
Transcript:
Are biosimilars going to play a big role in value-based design?
The question about whether biosimilars play a role, branded drugs play a role, generics play a role, I think all of these questions about specific interventions take us back to what makes VBID different from other types of payment insurance schemes which is this era of clinical nuance.
It has always been our view that the value of a service depends not on the service itself, but who gets it, when in the course of the disease, by whom, and where. So, whether that be a branded drug, a generic drug, a specialty drug, or a biosimilar, there is a time in the course of the sequence of care where drugs are considered very high value, and that exact same drug might be considered low-value.
So as opposed to talking about preferred branded drugs or specialty drugs or biosimilars or generics, as many people know, there are some generics that I would pay people to take. There are also some generic drugs I would not give my dog. The same holds true for biosimilars. If there is evidence to suggest that a biosimilar at this point in time is a first-line drug, then the patient should have access to that and the provider should not have problems in terms of having to send faxes or make phone calls or whatever else to use it.
But that requires not just transparency, not just consumerism, not just skin in the game. This requires clinical expertise that fortunately or unfortunately most patients just don’t have. So instead of relying on patients to shop around, and make these types of decisions, I think the onus should be on providers. They for the most part want to do what’s best for their patients. We need to have their compensation systems aligned with good choices, but more importantly if a provider decides that something is best for his patient, whether that be a biosimilar, whether it be a specially drug, whether it be a branded drug or generic, when that clinical situation says that this is the right service for that person at this right time, there should be unfettered access to that.
So, I think in the avdent of any innovation, like biosimilars or maybe more importantly, these new CAR-T therapies moving forward, we need to access not only the clinical benefits that have come to them, not only the cost for which it has incurred, but understanding that drug and that cost, the value of which depends on the clinical scenario that it might be. It might be so important that you want barriers to fall and in some patients to do it, the exact same drug may be a complete waste and in another patient another scenario. And I think that’s where VBID fits in.
Senators Introduce Bipartisan Legislation to Protect Skinny Labeling
January 2nd 2025To close out the year, 4 senators came together to introduce a new bipartisan bill to protect biosimilar and generic drug manufacturers from patent litigation when obtaining “skinny label” approvals for their products.
Biosimilars Policy Roundup for September 2024—Podcast Edition
October 6th 2024On this episode of Not So Different, we discuss the FDA's approval of a new biosimilar for treating retinal conditions, which took place in September 2024 alongside other major industry developments, including ongoing legal disputes and broader trends in market dynamics and regulatory challenges.
How Vertical Integration Drives Innovation and Access in Biosimilars
December 27th 2024Elie Bahou, PharmD, highlights how vertical integration in the biosimilar industry streamlines costs, improves supply reliability, accelerates market adoption, and enhances patient access, while emphasizing the value of collaboration, quality control, and value-based contracts for sustainable health care delivery.
13 Strategies to Avoid the Nocebo Effect During Biosimilar Switching
December 18th 2024A systematic review identified 13 strategies, including patient and provider education, empathetic communication, and shared decision-making, to mitigate the nocebo effect in biosimilar switching, emphasizing the need for a multifaceted approach to improve patient perceptions and therapeutic outcomes.
BioRationality: Withdrawal of Proposed Terminal Disclaimer Rule Spells Major Setback for Biosimilars
December 10th 2024The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)’s withdrawal of its proposed terminal disclaimer rule is seen as a setback for biosimilar developers, as it preserves patent prosecution practices that favor originator companies and increases costs for biosimilar competition, according to Sarfaraz K. Niazi, PhD.