Adrian van den Hoven, director general for Medicines for Europe, and Diogo Piedade, market access manager for Medicines for Europe, discuss the group’s recent EU report: Market Review—Biosimilar Medicine Markets.
Imagine that all 50 states in the United States had different biosimilars policies affecting pricing, usage, availability, promotion, and payer reimbursement. It’s something like that in the European Union, although there are overlapping trends from member member state to member state.
In this first part of a 2-part series, Tony Hagen, senior editor for The Center for Biosimilars®, interviews Adrian van den Hoven, director general for Medicines for Europe, and Diogo Piedade, market access manager for Medicines for Europe, about findings from the group’s recent European survey of biosimilar markets: Market Review—Biosimilar Medicine Markets.
The report elucidates policy variation and biosimilar penetration across EU markets. The biosimilar dispersal is not uniform, van den Hoven and Piedade explain. In the case of insulin, where competition is strong, biosimilar versions may be left out of the game.
In the United States, biologics producers have freedom to set their own prices, and the amount and type of competition may influence the discounts on biologics that are seen; but in the European Union price regulation is more often the norm, and competition between producers adds another level of discounting that results in the true cost, market by market, van den Hoven and Piedade explain.
The discussion also touches on the practice of reference pricing. In the European Union, drug reimbursement is sometimes pegged to a common value that is established through competition among producers. This is known as reference pricing.
The concern we have is will the losers of those tenders return to the market 3, 4 years down the road? Or will they just give up on the market for that product altogether? There are costs associated with you staying in the market, even if you're not selling.
However, this practice can lead to unsustainably low prices, van den Hoven and Piedade explain. They provide a few different examples of how producers have been affected, along with recommendations for improvement.
They also provide insight on the pros and cons of the length of the contracts, or tenders, producers receive to supply their biologics to EU markets. Longer tenders provide companies with a stable revenue flow, but these may outlast other producers’ staying power, or willingness to return for the next tender opening and bid to supply their own products.
Enhancing Adoption of Infused Biosimilars for a Sustainable Future
October 30th 2024An IQVIA report highlights challenges to the sustainability of infused biosimilars in the US, citing rebate walls and reimbursement policies, and proposes key solutions to enhance adoption and benefits for all stakeholders.
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.
Strengthening the Supply Chain: Key Insights From FDA Commissioner Dr Robert Califf
October 25th 2024At the GRx+Biosims conference, FDA Commissioner Robert Califf, MD, stressed the urgent need for data transparency in the global supply chain and the role of collaboration and artificial intelligence in ensuring the resilience of biosimilar and generic drug production.
FDA and Industry Experts Unpack Biosimilar Device Requirements
October 23rd 2024At the GRx+Biosims 2024 conference, a panel of industry experts and FDA officials discussed evolving device requirements for biosimilars and interchangeable biosimilars, highlighting new approaches to comparative use human factors studies, regulatory challenges, and alternative validation methods.
