Moorkens Evelien, Vulto Arnold G, Huys Isabelle, Dylst Pieter, Godman Brian, Keuerleber Simon, Claus Barbara, Dimitrova Maria, Petrova Guenka, Sović-Brkičić Ljiljana, Slabý Juraj, Šebesta Robin, Laius Ott, Karr Allan, Beck Morgane, Martikainen Jaana E, Selke Gisbert W, Spillane Susan, McCullagh Laura, Trifirò Gianluca, Vella Bonanno Patricia, Mack Asbjørn, Fogele Antra, Viksna Anita, Władysiuk Magdalena, Mota-Filipe Helder, Meshkov Dmitry, Kalaba Marija, Mencej Bedrač Simona, Fürst Jurij, Zara Corrine, Skiöld Peter, Magnússon Einar, Simoens Steven
KU Leuven Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, Leuven, Belgium.
Hospital Pharmacy, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
PLoS One. 2017 Dec 28;12(12):e0190147. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0190147. eCollection 2017.
Across European countries, differences exist in biosimilar policies, leading to variations in uptake of biosimilars and divergences in savings all over Europe.
The aim of this article is to provide an overview of different initiatives and policies that may influence the uptake of biosimilars in different European countries. Recommendations will be formulated on how to create sustainable uptake.
An overview of policies on biosimilars was obtained via a questionnaire, supplemented with relevant articles. Topics were organized in five themes: availability, pricing, reimbursement, demand-side policies, and recommendations to enhance uptake.
In all countries studied, biological medicines are available. Restrictions are mainly dependent on local organization of the healthcare system. Countries are willing to include biosimilars for reimbursement, but for commercial reasons they are not always marketed. In two thirds of countries, originator and biosimilar products may be subjected to internal reference pricing systems. Few countries have implemented specific incentives targeting physicians. Several countries are implementing pharmacist substitution; however, the scope and rules governing such substitution tend to vary between these countries. Reported educational policies tend to target primarily physicians, whereas fewer initiatives were reported for patients. Recommendations as proposed by the different country experts ranged from the need for information and communication on biosimilars to competitive pricing, more support for switching and guidance on substitution.
Most countries have put in place specific supply-side policies for promoting access to biosimilars. To supplement these measures, we propose that investments should be made to clearly communicate on biosimilars and educate stakeholders. Especially physicians need to be informed on the entry and use of biosimilars in order to create trust. When physicians are well-informed on the treatment options, further incentives should be offered to prescribe biosimilars. Gainsharing can be used as an incentive to prescribe, dispense or use biosimilars. This approach, in combination with binding quota, may support a sustainable biosimilar market.
在欧洲各国,生物类似药政策存在差异,这导致欧洲各地生物类似药的使用情况有所不同,节省费用的程度也存在差异。
本文旨在概述可能影响不同欧洲国家生物类似药使用情况的各种举措和政策。将就如何实现生物类似药的可持续使用制定建议。
通过问卷调查并辅以相关文章,对生物类似药政策进行了概述。主题分为五个方面:可及性、定价、报销、需求侧政策以及促进使用的建议。
在所研究的所有国家中,生物药均有供应。限制主要取决于当地医疗保健系统的组织情况。各国愿意将生物类似药纳入报销范围,但出于商业原因,它们并不总是上市销售。在三分之二的国家,原研药和生物类似药产品可能会受到内部参考定价系统的约束。很少有国家实施针对医生的具体激励措施。几个国家正在实施药剂师替换;然而,这些国家之间此类替换的范围和规则往往有所不同。报告的教育政策主要针对医生,而针对患者的举措较少。不同国家专家提出的建议包括需要就生物类似药进行信息沟通和宣传、实行竞争性定价、为换药提供更多支持以及提供替换指导。
大多数国家已制定了促进生物类似药可及性的具体供应侧政策。为补充这些措施,我们建议应进行投资,以便就生物类似药进行清晰的沟通并对利益相关者进行教育。特别是需要让医生了解生物类似药的进入和使用情况,以建立信任。当医生充分了解治疗选择时,应提供进一步的激励措施以促使其开具生物类似药处方。收益共享可作为开具、调配或使用生物类似药的激励措施。这种方法与约束性配额相结合,可能有助于支持可持续的生物类似药市场。