与参考生物制剂相比,生物仿制药的医生直销水平较低

Megan Hyland, Colleen Carey
{"title":"与参考生物制剂相比,生物仿制药的医生直销水平较低","authors":"Megan Hyland, Colleen Carey","doi":"10.1093/haschl/qxad069","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Biosimilars have the potential to greatly reduce U.S. spending on biologic drugs, but uptake of these competitor products varies. We used Open Payments data from 2014 to 2022 to proxy for direct-to-physician marketing and compared levels of activity between biologic and biosimilar drugs. Our analysis focused on six reference biologics that recently faced competition in the years immediately before and after the launch of the first biosimilar. We used Medicare Part B dosage units to measure market penetration of biosimilars and its relationship with biosimilar marketing activity. Lastly, we conducted a sensitivity test, comparing payments for primarily office- or hospital-based physicians, using affiliations constructed from Medicare carrier claims. Reference biologics greatly reduced the amount of direct-to-physician marketing in the post-launch period. Biosimilars generally engaged in low levels of activity relative to the historic performance of reference biologics. These trends were consistent across office- and hospital-based physicians. The intensity of biosimilars’ direct-to-physician marketing also had no apparent relationship with achieved market penetration. Our findings demonstrate that persistently high market shares of reference biologics cannot be explained by ongoing direct-to-physician marketing activities. At the same time, while such activities could educate physicians or induce switching, biosimilar entrants engaged in little direct-to-physician marketing.","PeriodicalId":94025,"journal":{"name":"Health affairs scholar","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Biosimilars Engage in Low Levels of Direct-to-Physician Marketing Relative to Reference Biologics\",\"authors\":\"Megan Hyland, Colleen Carey\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/haschl/qxad069\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Biosimilars have the potential to greatly reduce U.S. spending on biologic drugs, but uptake of these competitor products varies. We used Open Payments data from 2014 to 2022 to proxy for direct-to-physician marketing and compared levels of activity between biologic and biosimilar drugs. Our analysis focused on six reference biologics that recently faced competition in the years immediately before and after the launch of the first biosimilar. We used Medicare Part B dosage units to measure market penetration of biosimilars and its relationship with biosimilar marketing activity. Lastly, we conducted a sensitivity test, comparing payments for primarily office- or hospital-based physicians, using affiliations constructed from Medicare carrier claims. Reference biologics greatly reduced the amount of direct-to-physician marketing in the post-launch period. Biosimilars generally engaged in low levels of activity relative to the historic performance of reference biologics. These trends were consistent across office- and hospital-based physicians. The intensity of biosimilars’ direct-to-physician marketing also had no apparent relationship with achieved market penetration. Our findings demonstrate that persistently high market shares of reference biologics cannot be explained by ongoing direct-to-physician marketing activities. At the same time, while such activities could educate physicians or induce switching, biosimilar entrants engaged in little direct-to-physician marketing.\",\"PeriodicalId\":94025,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health affairs scholar\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health affairs scholar\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"0\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/haschl/qxad069\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health affairs scholar","FirstCategoryId":"0","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/haschl/qxad069","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

生物仿制药有可能大大减少美国在生物药物上的支出,但对这些竞争产品的接受程度各不相同。我们使用2014年至2022年的Open Payments数据来代表直接面向医生的营销,并比较了生物药和生物仿制药之间的活动水平。我们的分析集中在六种参考生物制剂,这些参考生物制剂在首个生物仿制药上市前后几年面临竞争。我们使用医疗保险B部分剂量单位来衡量生物类似药的市场渗透率及其与生物类似药营销活动的关系。最后,我们进行了一个敏感性测试,比较了主要以办公室或医院为基础的医生的支付,使用从医疗保险运营商索赔中构建的关联关系。参考生物制剂大大减少了上市后直接面向医生的营销数量。与参考生物制剂的历史表现相比,生物仿制药的活性水平通常较低。这些趋势在办公室和医院的医生中都是一致的。生物仿制药直接面向医生的营销力度也与市场渗透率无明显关系。我们的研究结果表明,参考生物制剂的持续高市场份额不能用持续的直接面向医生的营销活动来解释。与此同时,虽然这些活动可以教育医生或诱导转换,但生物仿制药进入者很少直接面向医生进行营销。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Biosimilars Engage in Low Levels of Direct-to-Physician Marketing Relative to Reference Biologics
Biosimilars have the potential to greatly reduce U.S. spending on biologic drugs, but uptake of these competitor products varies. We used Open Payments data from 2014 to 2022 to proxy for direct-to-physician marketing and compared levels of activity between biologic and biosimilar drugs. Our analysis focused on six reference biologics that recently faced competition in the years immediately before and after the launch of the first biosimilar. We used Medicare Part B dosage units to measure market penetration of biosimilars and its relationship with biosimilar marketing activity. Lastly, we conducted a sensitivity test, comparing payments for primarily office- or hospital-based physicians, using affiliations constructed from Medicare carrier claims. Reference biologics greatly reduced the amount of direct-to-physician marketing in the post-launch period. Biosimilars generally engaged in low levels of activity relative to the historic performance of reference biologics. These trends were consistent across office- and hospital-based physicians. The intensity of biosimilars’ direct-to-physician marketing also had no apparent relationship with achieved market penetration. Our findings demonstrate that persistently high market shares of reference biologics cannot be explained by ongoing direct-to-physician marketing activities. At the same time, while such activities could educate physicians or induce switching, biosimilar entrants engaged in little direct-to-physician marketing.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信