Policies for biosimilar uptake in Europe: An overview.

BACKGROUND: Across European countries, differences exist in biosimilar policies, leading to variations in uptake of biosimilars and divergences in savings all over Europe. OBJECTIVES: 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. METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSIONS: 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.

Changes in the utilization of venlafaxine after the introduction of generics in Sweden.

BACKGROUND: There has been an appreciable increase in the prescribing efficiency of proton pump inhibitors, statins, and renin-angiotensin inhibitor drugs in Sweden in recent years. This has been achieved through multiple reforms encouraging the prescription of generics at low prices versus patented drugs in the same class. Generic venlafaxine also presents an opportunity to save costs given the prevalence of depression. However, depression is more complex to treat, with physicians reluctant to change prescriptions if patients are responding to a particular antidepressant. OBJECTIVES: We assessed (a) changes in the utilization pattern of venlafaxine versus other newer antidepressants before and after the availability of generic venlafaxine and before and after the initiation of prescription restrictions for duloxetine limiting its prescription to refractory patients, (b) utilization of generic versus original venlafaxine after its availability, and (c) price reductions for generic venlafaxine and the subsequent influence on total expenditure on newer antidepressants over time. METHODOLOGY: We performed interrupted time series analysis of changes in monthly reimbursed prescriptions using defined daily doses (DDDs) of patients dispensed at least one newer antidepressant from January 2007 to August 2011. DDDs was defined as the average maintenance dose of a drug when used in its major indication in adults. This included 19 months after the availability of generic venlafaxine and before initiation of prescription restrictions for duloxetine to 13 months after prescription restrictions. Total expenditure and expenditure/DDD for venlafaxine were measured over time. RESULTS: No appreciable change in the utilization pattern for venlafaxine was observed after generic availability when no appreciable demand-side activities by the regions (counties) were implemented to encourage its use. The utilization of venlafaxine significantly increased after prescription restrictions for duloxetine. Generic venlafaxine was dispensed once available, reaching 99.6 % of total venlafaxine (DDD basis) by August 2011. There was an appreciable fall in expenditure for newer antidepressants in Sweden after generic venlafaxine despite increased utilization, helped by a 90 % reduction in expenditure/DDD for venlafaxine by the end of the study versus prepatent loss prices. CONCLUSION: Multiple demand-side measures are needed to change physician prescribing habits. Authorities should not rely on a spillover effect between drug classes to effect change. Limited influence of prescription restrictions on the subsequent utilization of duloxetine reflects the complexity of this disease area. This is exacerbated by heterogeneous indications for duloxetine.