Does the introduction of an infliximab biosimilar always result in savings for hospitals? A descriptive study using real-world data.

BACKGROUND: Biosimilars are biologic drugs that have the potential to increase the efficiency of healthcare spending and curb drug-related cost increases. However, their introduction into hospital formularies through initiatives such as non-medical switching must be carefully orchestrated so as not to cause treatment discontinuation or result in increased health resource utilization, such as additional visits or laboratory tests, among others. This retrospective cohort study aims to assess the impact of the introduction of CT-P13 on the healthcare expenditures of patients who were treated with originator infliximab or CT-P13. METHODS: Gastroenterology, immunoallergology and rheumatology patients treated between September 2017 and December 2020 at a university hospital in Western Switzerland were included and divided into seven cohorts, based on their treatment pathway (i.e., use and discontinuation of CT-P13 and/or originator infliximab). Costs in Swiss francs were obtained from the hospital's cost accounting department and length of stay was extracted from inpatient records. Comparisons of costs and length of stay between cohorts were calculated by bootstrapping. RESULTS: Sixty immunoallergology, 84 rheumatology and 114 gastroenterology patients were included. Inpatient and outpatient costs averaged (sd) CHF 1,611 (1,020) per hospital day and CHF 4,991 (6,931) per infusion, respectively. The mean (sd) length of stay was 20 (28) days. Although immunoallergology and rheumatology patients had higher average costs than gastroenterology patients, differences in costs and length of stay were not formally explained by treatment pathway. Differences in health resource utilization were marginal. CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of CT-P13 and the disruption of patient treatment management were not associated with differences in average outpatient and inpatient costs and length of stay, in contrast to the results reported in the rest of the literature. Future research should focus on the cost-effectiveness of non-medical switching policies and the potential benefits for patients.

Current Expertise, Opinions, and Attitude toward TNF-⍺ Antagonist Biosimilars among Physicians: A Self-Administered Online Survey in Western Switzerland.

Tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-⍺) antagonists are biological drugs with multiple authorized biosimilars. Biosimilars are becoming critical to the financial sustainability of health systems. Recent studies emphasize that physicians' knowledge regarding biosimilars has not yet progressed sufficiently to overcome their concerns regarding biosimilars' safety and efficacy. To assess the current knowledge, opinions, and attitudes toward TNF-⍺ antagonist biosimilars among postgraduate physicians and specialists, an anonymous, self-administered survey was implemented on SurveyMonkey between February and May 2022. The survey was validated through think-aloud interviews with senior and postgraduate physicians in rheumatology, gastroenterology, and immunoallergology, and a senior epidemiologist. Participant recruitment was conducted with the help of the physicians' professional societies and departmental head physicians of two university hospitals in Western Switzerland. Most physicians felt more comfortable initiating a TNF-⍺ antagonist biosimilar in biologic-naive patients (BNPs) than switching patients stabilized on the original biologic (originator). However, most participants agreed that BNPs should start treatment with the biosimilar rather than the originator when available. Postgraduate physicians and specialists in rheumatology, gastroenterology, and immunoallergology who participated in this survey were familiar with TNF-⍺ antagonist biosimilars and were confident in prescribing them. Yet, they still preferred to avoid switching a patient already on the originator.

Exploring the Reasons Behind the Substantial Discontinuation Rate Among Patients Taking CT-P13 in a Large Tertiary Hospital in Western Switzerland: A Retrospective Cohort Study Using Routinely Collected Medical Data.

BACKGROUND: CT-P13 is an infliximab biosimilar that was granted market authorization in Switzerland in 2016. Despite the growing literature supporting the equivalence of CT-P13 compared with originator infliximab regarding the efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity and the undeniable cost-saving opportunities, CT-P13 remains widely underused in Switzerland. OBJECTIVE: Leaving aside the phenomenon of a low initiation rate, this study aimed to explore the reasons behind the high discontinuation rate observed among the patients taking CT-P13 in a large tertiary hospital in Western Switzerland. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study using routinely collected data. Patients were eligible if they received originator infliximab or CT-P13 between September 2017 and December 2020. They were included if they had received at least two CT-P13 infusions during the same period. Patients were excluded if the follow-up was incomplete prior to or 6 months after their first CT-P13 infusion and if they had an oncological main diagnosis. Primary outcomes were the reasons for treatment discontinuation. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-six patients were included and classified into two groups: switchers who were treated with originator infliximab and were switched to CT-P13 (n = 85, 54%) and initiators who did not receive originator infliximab prior to CT-P13 treatment (n = 71, 46%). Included patients belonged to three different groups of diagnosis: gastroenterological (67, 43%), rheumatological (61, 39%), and immunological (28, 18%). Twenty-three (27%) switchers and 35 (49%) initiators discontinued CT-P13 after 12 months. Main reasons for CT-P13 discontinuation were lack of efficacy (n = 21, 36%) and secondary loss of response (n = 16, 28%); however, objective assessments were not available. Initiators' probability to discontinue CT-P13 at 12 months was significantly higher than switchers' (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Lack of efficacy and secondary loss of response were the main reasons for the high CT-P13 discontinuation rate observed in a large tertiary hospital in Western Switzerland. Lack of active training and coordination among healthcare professionals and little education in patients may have exacerbated patients' subjective complaints and increased the CT-P13 discontinuation rate.

Randomized clinical trial to assess the protective efficacy of a Plasmodium vivax CS synthetic vaccine.

A randomized, double-blind, controlled vaccine clinical trial was conducted to assess, as the primary outcome, the safety and protective efficacy of the Plasmodium vivax circumsporozoite (CS) protein in healthy malaria-naïve (phase IIa) and semi-immune (phase IIb) volunteers. Participants (n = 35) were randomly selected from a larger group (n = 121) and further divided into naïve (n = 17) and semi-immune (n = 18) groups and were immunized at months 0, 2, and 6 with PvCS formulated in Montanide ISA-51 adjuvant or placebo (adjuvant alone). Specific antibodies and IFN-γ responses to PvCS were determined as secondary outcome; all experimental volunteers developed specific IgG and IFN-γ. Three months after the last immunization, all participants were subjected to controlled human malaria infection. All naive controls became infected and drastic parasitemia reduction, including sterile protection, developed in several experimental volunteers in phase IIa (6/11) (54%, 95% CI 0.25-0.84) and phase IIb (7/11) (64%, 95% CI 0.35-0.92). However, no difference in parasitemia was observed between the phase IIb experimental and control subgroups. In conclusion, this study demonstrates significant protection in both naïve and semi-immune volunteers, encouraging further PvCS vaccine clinical development. Trial registration number NCT02083068. This trial was funded by Colciencias (grant 529-2009), NHLBI (grant RHL086488 A), and MVDC/CIV Foundation (grant 2014-1206).

Pharmacists' considerations on non-medical switching at the hospital: a systematic review of the economic outcomes of cost-saving therapeutic drug classes.

OBJECTIVES: Non-medical switching (NMS) strategies have the capacity to reduce overall costs in hospitals while maintaining a high level of care. However, the most appropriate diseases and/or medicines for NMS strategies are still vague. The aim of this review was to give a state-of-the-art summary regarding the economic outcomes resulting from the use of NMS strategies and to discuss whether they would be implementable in a hospital inpatient setting. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted in Medline, Embase, and ScienceDirect. Studies published between 1988 and 2018 were included if they evaluated the economic impact of NMS strategies or if they performed an economic evaluation between two drugs. Studies regarding antineoplastic agents, endocrine therapies, and immunostimulants, or immunosuppressants, and biosimilars were excluded. RESULTS: Fifty (69%) studies assessing an NMS strategy and 22 (31%) studies comparing two medicines were allocated to four categories: prospective studies (n=8, 11%); retrospective chart reviews (n=29, 40%); retrospective claims analysis (n=13, 18%); and retrospective data analysis (n=22, 31%). Hypercholesterolemia, peptic ulcer, and gastro-oesophageal reflux diseases, diabetes mellitus, and venous thromboembolism were the most prevalent diseases in studies evaluating an NMS strategy. Sixty-eight per cent of the included papers reported a reduction in costs with no significant changes in health outcomes and 8 per cent reported a deterioration in health outcomes and/or increased costs. CONCLUSION: Regardless of the exclusion of studies regarding biologics or medicines used in oncology, the review highlights that NMS strategies with medicines whose management do not require a thorough clinical assessment were associated with reduced costs and no significant changes in patients' health outcomes, in the inpatient setting. NMS strategies targeting medicines that require an extensive clinical assessment should be evaluated using hospital-specific effectiveness and/or utility data prior to their implementation.