Supat Thongpooswan, Anupam Das, Pravin Patil, Mark Latymer, Lyndon Llamado, James Wee
{"title":"Physicians' and patients' perception of biosimilars and factors affecting biosimilar prescribing in selected Asian countries: a survey study.","authors":"Supat Thongpooswan, Anupam Das, Pravin Patil, Mark Latymer, Lyndon Llamado, James Wee","doi":"10.1080/14712598.2024.2400523","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study evaluated physicians' and patients' beliefs about biosimilars in Hong Kong, India, Pakistan, Singapore, Taiwan, and Thailand.</p><p><strong>Research design and methods: </strong>An online survey administered to physicians (dermatologists, <i>n</i> = 119; gastroenterologists, <i>n</i> = 148; rheumatologists, <i>n</i> = 161) between 22 October 2021 and 7 January 2022, and patients (<i>n</i> = 90) with rheumatic or inflammatory bowel disease between 25 October 2021 and 12 April 2022.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Most (68%) physicians reported having a strong knowledge about biosimilars, yet 49% indicated that biosimilars are readily available to them. Physicians cited potential cost savings (81%) as the main benefit of biosimilars, and cost/coverage support (36%), patient support (25%), and increasing biosimilar awareness/education (24%) as main strategies for improving usage. Few (21%) patients reported having a strong knowledge about biosimilars. Patients cited offering alternatives in case of drug shortages (77%) as the main benefit of biosimilars, and cost/coverage support (53%), increasing awareness of product profile (22%), and providing biosimilars with a good efficacy profile/effective product (19%) as main strategies for improving usage.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Programs focused on cost/coverage support, patient support, and biosimilar awareness could improve acceptance of biosimilars for chronic immune-mediated inflammatory diseases in Asian countries, thereby increasing patient access to essential biologic therapies.</p>","PeriodicalId":12084,"journal":{"name":"Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14712598.2024.2400523","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: This study evaluated physicians' and patients' beliefs about biosimilars in Hong Kong, India, Pakistan, Singapore, Taiwan, and Thailand.
Research design and methods: An online survey administered to physicians (dermatologists, n = 119; gastroenterologists, n = 148; rheumatologists, n = 161) between 22 October 2021 and 7 January 2022, and patients (n = 90) with rheumatic or inflammatory bowel disease between 25 October 2021 and 12 April 2022.
Results: Most (68%) physicians reported having a strong knowledge about biosimilars, yet 49% indicated that biosimilars are readily available to them. Physicians cited potential cost savings (81%) as the main benefit of biosimilars, and cost/coverage support (36%), patient support (25%), and increasing biosimilar awareness/education (24%) as main strategies for improving usage. Few (21%) patients reported having a strong knowledge about biosimilars. Patients cited offering alternatives in case of drug shortages (77%) as the main benefit of biosimilars, and cost/coverage support (53%), increasing awareness of product profile (22%), and providing biosimilars with a good efficacy profile/effective product (19%) as main strategies for improving usage.
Conclusion: Programs focused on cost/coverage support, patient support, and biosimilar awareness could improve acceptance of biosimilars for chronic immune-mediated inflammatory diseases in Asian countries, thereby increasing patient access to essential biologic therapies.
期刊介绍：
Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy (1471-2598; 1744-7682) is a MEDLINE-indexed, international journal publishing peer-reviewed research across all aspects of biological therapy.
Each article is structured to incorporate the author’s own expert opinion on the impact of the topic on research and clinical practice and the scope for future development.
The audience consists of scientists and managers in the healthcare and biopharmaceutical industries and others closely involved in the development and application of biological therapies for the treatment of human disease.
The journal welcomes:
Reviews covering therapeutic antibodies and vaccines, peptides and proteins, gene therapies and gene transfer technologies, cell-based therapies and regenerative medicine
Drug evaluations reviewing the clinical data on a particular biological agent
Original research papers reporting the results of clinical investigations on biological agents and biotherapeutic-based studies with a strong link to clinical practice
Comprehensive coverage in each review is complemented by the unique Expert Collection format and includes the following sections:
Expert Opinion – a personal view of the data presented in the article, a discussion on the developments that are likely to be important in the future, and the avenues of research likely to become exciting as further studies yield more detailed results;
Article Highlights – an executive summary of the author’s most critical points.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
