Before the Wisconsin State Assembly’s health committee today is Assembly Bill 679, an act to address biosimilar substitution at the pharmacy level.
Before the Wisconsin State Assembly’s health committee today is Assembly Bill 679, an act to address biosimilar substitution at the pharmacy level. The state Senate passed the measure as Senate Bill 575 last week.
Under the bill, pharmacists can dispense cheaper interchangeable biosimilars instead of brand-name biologics unless the prescriber opposes the substitution. This strategy would follow the current process for the substitution of generic drugs in the pharmacy setting. The bill defines an “interchangeable biological product” as a biological product that the FDA says meets standards for interchangeability pursuant to federal law. Thus far, however, the FDA has not granted any biosimilar an interchangeable designation.
The Wisconsin State Journal reports that the 2 Republican lead sponsors of the bill, Representative Mike Rohrkaste and Senator Leah Vukmir, presenting in the Assembly today, say that allowing pharmacy-level substitution could save consumers up to 20%. “This bill will result in the lowering of prescription drug prices for Wisconsin families and seniors,” said Vukimir during a public hearing in December 2017.
Since 2013, 35 states and Puerto Rico have introduced and subsequently passed legislation on biologics and biosimilar substitution, according to the National Conference of State Legislature.
While the specifics of state laws vary, most legislation regarding biosimilar substitution includes 5 principles endorsed by Biotechnology Innovation Organization (BIO), a biotech industry trade group. BIO considers these principles essential to overcome specific challenges with biologics:
Notably, laws in Georgia, Idaho, Kentucky, Montana, Nevada, New Jersey, and North Carolina do not require pharmacists to notify patients of substitution. In fact, Florida does not even require prescriber notification when a substitution is made.
Several patient groups in addition to drug makers Pfizer, Amgen, AbbVie, and Johnson & Johnson reportedly support Assembly Bill 679.
BioRationality: Should mRNA Copies Be Filed as NDAs or Biosimilars?
November 4th 2024The article by Sarfaraz K. Niazi, PhD, argues that the FDA’s classification of future copies of messenger RNA (mRNA) products could be reconsidered, suggesting they might be eligible for new drug applications (NDAs) or a hybrid biosimilar category due to their unique characteristics and increasing prevalence.
A New Chapter: How 2023 Will Shape the US Biosimilar Space for 2024 and Beyond
December 31st 2023On this episode of Not So Different, Cencora's Brian Biehn and Corey Ford take a look back at major policy and regulatory advancements in 2023 and how these changes will alter the space going forward.
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.
The Subcutaneous Revolution: Zymfentra and the Future of IBD Care With Dr Andres Yarur
December 17th 2023On this episode of Not So Different, Andres Yarur, MD, a researcher and associate professor of medicine at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, discusses the significance of the FDA approval for Zymfentra, the world's first subcutaneous infliximab product, for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).
Calling for Unified Biosimilar Standards, Stronger Education at GRx+Biosims
October 23rd 2024At the GRx+Biosims conference, a fireside chat highlighted the need to streamline biosimilar development and strengthen industry collaboration, with Sarah Yim, MD, of the FDA, emphasizing education's key role in building trust and adoption.