Knowledge and perceptions of naming for biosimilars in the US

Biosimilars/Research | Posted 10/09/2021 post-comment0 Post your comment

The relatively recent introduction of biosimilars to the US market and the new naming convention for biopharmaceuticals prompted exploration of their impact in clinical practice. Naming guidance for new biological products and biosimilars was published by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2017, which proposed the use of a core name followed by a 4-letter suffix devoid of meaning to facilitate pharmacovigilance [1]. In order to find out how this system was viewed by healthcare providers, researchers evaluated use of, knowledge about, perceptions of, and preferences for this naming convention in clinical practice [2]. Previous studies informed the hypothesis that healthcare providers would demonstrate knowledge gaps surrounding biosimilars and opinions regarding 4-letter suffix use would be inconsistent. This study aimed to understand the impact of the recent naming guidance in clinical practice. 

Naming 1 V13I27

A cross-sectional study was performed by distributing a survey to 506 healthcare providers who had previously prescribed or encountered biosimilars in clinical practice. The survey was emailed every two weeks for two months to healthcare providers in two large healthcare systems in Philadelphia: the University of Pennsylvania Health System and the Corporal Michael J Crescenz VA Medical Center. The study aimed to measure knowledge about key information and discern whether certain naming trends were preferred in clinical practice. Differences in responses across pre-hypothesized subgroups were tested for statistical significance using ctesting and Fisher’s exact testing.

Of the 506 surveys that were sent to prescribers and other clinical staff; 50 were returned from inactive email addresses. Of the remaining 456, 83 (16%) responded. Most were from the University of Pennsylvania, with the highest response rate in the Divisions of Hematology/Oncology and Rheumatology, and the Department of Pharmacy. Although respondents had a general understanding of the regulatory criteria for approval, knowledge was generally poor: only 52% of all respondents correctly identified that a biosimilar differed from a generic drug. When asked about biosimilar naming, 67% reported using the brand name in clinical practice to distinguish between biosimilars and their reference products. In contrast, only a minority of respondents reported regular use of the 4-letter suffix to identify biological products. Notably, most respondents (68% overall) indicated a neutral response when asked if the 4-letter suffix promoted medical errors and most prescribers (76%) indicated that the 4-letter suffix did not affect their decision to use biosimilars. Thus, it appears that the 4-letter suffix has limited utility in clinical care.

The authors therefore concluded that a knowledge gap about biosimilars remains and use of the FDA’s new naming convention in clinical practice is limited. Education and more experience with biosimilars are needed for healthcare providers to familiarize with and increase use of this naming convention in the context of patient care.

Conflict of interest
The authors of the research paper [2] declared that there was no conflict of interest.

Abstracted by Marianna Olave, Rheumatology and Infectious Disease, Medical Research Program, Corporal Michael J Crescenz VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Editor’s comment
Readers interested to learn more about naming of biosimilars are invited to visit www.gabi-journal.net to view the following manuscripts published in GaBI Journal:

US FDA proposals for naming of biologicals and labelling of biosimilars

Effect of naming on pharmacists’ perceptions and dispensing of biosimilars

GaBI Journal is indexed in Embase, Scopus, Emerging Sources Citation Index and more.

Readers interested in contributing a research or perspective paper to GaBI Journal – an independent, peer reviewed academic journal – please send us your submission here.

GaBI Journal Citation Impact
1.9 – CiteScore 2020 (calculated on 5 May 2021)
1.9 – CiteScoreTracker 2021 (Last updated on 4 August 2021)

Submit a manuscript to GaBI Journal

Related articles
Knowledge and perceptions about naming biosimilars in the US

Approaches to naming and labelling of biosimilars

LATIN AMERICAN FORUM

The brand-new section the ‘Latin American Forum’ on GaBI has been launched. The objective of this new section is to provide you with all the latest news and updates on developments of generic and biosimilar medicines in Latin America in Spanish. 

View this week’s headline article: Conocimiento y percepciones de la denominación de biosimilares en EE. UU.

Browse the news in the Latin American Forum!

Register to receive the GaBI Latin American Forum newsletter. Inform colleagues and friends of this new initiative.

LATIN AMERICAN FORUM

Se ha lanzado la nueva sección del ‘Foro Latinoamericano’ sobre GaBI. El objetivo de esta nueva sección es brindarle las últimas noticias y actualizaciones sobre desarrollos de medicamentos genéricos y biosimilares en América Latina en español.

Vea el artículo principal de esta semana: Conocimiento y percepciones de la denominación de biosimilares en EE. UU.

Explore las noticias en el Foro Latinoamericano!

Regístrese para recibir el boletín informativo GaBI Latin American Forum. Informe a colegas y amigos sobre esta nueva iniciativa. 

  
References
1. GaBI Online - Generics and Biosimilars Initiative. FDA issues draft guidance on naming biologicals [www.gabionline.net]. Mol, Belgium: Pro Pharma Communications International; [cited 2021 Sep 10]. Available from: www.gabionline.net/Guidelines/FDA-issues-draft-guidance-on-naming-biologicals 
2. Olave M, Lavery C, Leonard CE, et al. Knowledge of biosimilars and perceptions of the naming conventions for biosimilar products in clinical practice in the United States. Drug Ther Perspectives. 2021;37:338-46.

Permission granted to reproduce for personal and non-commercial use only. All other reproduction, copy or reprinting of all or part of any ‘Content’ found on this website is strictly prohibited without the prior consent of the publisher. Contact the publisher to obtain permission before redistributing.

Copyright – Unless otherwise stated all contents of this website are © 2021 Pro Pharma Communications International. All Rights Reserved.

comment icon Comments (0)
Post your comment
Related content
Clinical development of biosimilars in the oncology setting
Cancer image015
Biosimilars/Research Posted 17/09/2021
New quality-range-setting method for biosimilarity assessment
127 AA010925
Biosimilars/Research Posted 10/09/2021
Biosimilars and interchangeability in oncology
Switching mAb Pfizer V18K30
Biosimilars/Research Posted 03/09/2021
Most viewed articles
About GaBI
Home/About GaBI Posted 05/08/2009
EU guidelines for biosimilars
EMA logo 1 V13C15
Home/Guidelines Posted 08/10/2010