Biosimilars confer significant cost-saving advantages and expand patients’ access to biologic therapies in cancer care. In line with the increasing availability of antineoplastic biosimilars, it is pertinent to understand the oncologists’ view on the adoption of biosimilars in their clinical practice. The study aimed to assess (i) the prevalence of biosimilar use, (ii) perception towards biosimilars, (iii) factors influencing the use of biosimilars and (iv) knowledge about biosimilars among Malaysian oncologists.
Methods
A cross-sectional survey was conducted among clinical oncologists and medical oncologists in Malaysia between January 2020 and February 2021 using a structured 31-item questionnaire.
Results
Among the 121 oncologists registered in the country, 36 responded (response rate = 30%). A total of 64% of the respondents prescribed biosimilars either often or always. Most oncologists (72%) agreed or strongly agreed that switching will not have a significant effect on the treatment benefit, with lower percentages saying that they agreed or strongly agreed that it will not lead to the emergence of additional adverse effects (56%) or harmful immunogenicity (64%). Patients’ preferences (40%) and the non-availability of biosimilars in hospitals (34%) are the major barriers cited to the prescribing of biosimilars. Cost differences and robust pharmacovigilance activities are the two most important factors that would influence the prescribing of biosimilars. The mean score of knowledge in biosimilar among respondents was 3.81 (± 0.86) out of a maximum possible score of 6.
Conclusions
The identified gap in prescribing and the use of biosimilars among Malaysian oncologists warrant educational intervention and robust pharmacovigilance activities to facilitate the prescribing of biosimilars and ultimately increase the accessibility to biologics in cancer treatment.
Ab ManabAIbrahim TaminNSAbdullahNH, et al.Malaysian National cancer registry report 2007-2011. Putrajaya, Malaysia: National Cancer Institute, Ministry of Health Malaysia, 2016.
3.
MahipalAGrotheyA. Role of biologics in first-line treatment of colorectal cancer. J Oncol Pract2016; 12: 1219–1228.
4.
BartschRWenzelCStegerGG. Trastuzumab in the management of early and advanced stage breast cancer. Biologics2007; 1: 19–31.
5.
Bhoo-PathyNNgCWLimGC, et al.Financial toxicity after cancer in a setting with universal health coverage: a call for urgent action. J Oncol Pract2019; 15: e537–e546.
6.
MulcahyAWHCaseJakub PSpencerR. Biosimilar cost savings in the United States: initial experience and future potential. Rand Health Q2018; 7: 3–3.
SarnolaKMerikoskiMJyrkkäJ, et al.Physicians’ perceptions of the uptake of biosimilars: a systematic review. BMJ Open2020; 10: e034183.
9.
BasTGOliu CastilloC. Biosimilars in developed and developing east and southeast Asian countries: Japan, South Korea, and Malaysia-overview, evolution, and regulations assessment. Biomed Res Int2016; 2016: 5910403.
10.
HübelKKronFLuxMP. Biosimilars in oncology: effects on economy and therapeutic innovations. Eur J Cancer2020; 139: 10–19.
Mohd SaniNAzizZKamarulzamanA. Biosimilars in Malaysia: regulatory framework, approved products, and adverse effects. Ther Innov Regul Sci2021; 55: 490–502.
13.
CookJWMcGrathMKDixonMD, et al.Academic oncology clinicians’ understanding of biosimilars and information needed before prescribing. Ther Adv Med Oncol2019; 11: 1–12.
14.
HadoussaSBouhlelMSoussiMA, et al.Perception of hematologists and oncologists about the biosimilars: a prospective Tunisian study based on a survey. J Oncol Pharm Pract2020; 26: 124–132.
15.
HalimiVDaciAAncevska NetkovskaK, et al.Clinical and regulatory concerns of biosimilars: a review of literature. Int J Environ Res Public Health.2020; 17(16). doi:10.3390/ijerph17165800.
16.
Giuliani R, Tabernero J, Cardoso F, et al. Knowledge and use of biosimilars in oncology: a survey by the European Society for Medical Oncology. ESMO Open 2019; 4(2): 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1136/esmoopen-2018-000460.
O'CallaghanJBerminghamMLeonardM, et al.Assessing awareness and attitudes of healthcare professionals on the use of biosimilar medicines: a survey of physicians and pharmacists in Ireland. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol2017; 88: 252–261.
19.
ChapmanSRFitzpatrickRWAladulMI. Knowledge, attitude and practice of healthcare professionals towards infliximab and insulin glargine biosimilars: result of a UK web-based survey. BMJ Open.2017; 7: e016730.
20.
World Health Organization. Regional Office for the Western P. Malaysia health system review. The health systems in transition (HiT) profiles. Manila: WHO Regional Office for the Western Pacific, 2012.
21.
MoorkensEJonker-ExlerCHuysI, et al.Overcoming barriers to the market access of biosimilars in the European Union: the case of biosimilar monoclonal antibodies. Front Pharmacol2016; 7: 93.
22.
JensenTBBartelsDSædderEA, et al.The Danish model for the quick and safe implementation of infliximab and etanercept biosimilars. Eur J Clin Pharmacol2020; 76: 35–40.
23.
NabhanCValleyAFeinbergBA. Barriers to oncology biosimilars uptake in the United States. Oncologist2018; 23: 1261–1265.
24.
AronsonJKGoldacreBFernerRE. Prescribing biosimilars. Br Med J2018; 362: k3141.
25.
MoorkensEVultoAGHuysI. Biosimilars in Belgium: a proposal for a more competitive market. Acta Clin Belg 2020; 76(6): 441–452. doi:10.1080/17843286.2020.1761690
26.
GürlerFKasımDDKurt İnciB, et al.Current status of biosimilars in Turkey: a survey among medical oncologists. J Oncol Pharm Pract 2021; 1–8. 10781552211031643. doi:10.1177/10781552211031643
27.
DaneseSFiorinoGMichettiP. Changes in biosimilar knowledge among European Crohn's Colitis Organization [ECCO] members: an updated survey. J Crohns Colitis2016; 10: 1362–1365.
28.
GrabowskiDHendersonBLamD, et al.Attitudes towards subsequent entry biologics/biosimilars: a survey of Canadian rheumatologists. Clin Rheumatol2015; 34: 1427–1433.
29.
PasinaLCasadeiGNobiliA. A survey among hospital specialists and pharmacists about biosimilars. Eur J Intern Med2016; 35: e31–e33.
30.
GibofskyAMcCabeD. US Rheumatologists’ beliefs and knowledge about biosimilars: a survey. Rheumatology (Oxford).2021; 60: 896–901.
31.
TeepleAEllisLAHuffL, et al.Physician attitudes about non-medical switching to biosimilars: results from an online physician survey in the United States. Curr Med Res Opin2019; 35: 611–617.
32.
BajiPGulacsiLLovaszBD, et al.Treatment preferences of originator versus biosimilar drugs in Crohn's disease; discrete choice experiment among gastroenterologists. Scand J Gastroenterol2016; 51: 22–27.
33.
BajiPGulacsiLGolovicsPA, et al.Perceived risks contra benefits of using biosimilar drugs in ulcerative colitis: discrete choice experiment among gastroenterologists. Value Health Reg Issues2016; 10: 85–90.
34.
HemmingtonADalbethNJarrettP, et al.Medical specialists’ attitudes to prescribing biosimilars. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf2017; 26: 570–577.
35.
CargninSShinJIGenazzaniAA, et al.Comparative efficacy and safety of trastuzumab biosimilars to the reference drug: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol2020; 86: 577–588.
36.
AlexeevSMKhorinkoAVMukhametshinaGZ, et al.Randomized double-blind clinical trial comparing safety and efficacy of the biosimilar BCD-022 with reference trastuzumab. BMC Cancer2020; 20: 83.
37.
JørgensenKKOlsenICGollGL, et al.Switching from originator infliximab to biosimilar CT-P13 compared with maintained treatment with originator infliximab (NOR-SWITCH): a 52-week, randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority trial. The Lancet2017; 389: 2304–2316.
38.
GascónPKrendyukovAHöbelN, et al.MONITOR-GCSF DLBCL subanalysis: treatment patterns/outcomes with biosimilar filgrastim for chemotherapy-induced/febrile neutropenia prophylaxis. Eur J Haematol2018; 100: 241–246.
39.
RochéHEymardJCRadjiA, et al.Biosimilar filgrastim treatment patterns and prevention of febrile neutropenia: a prospective multicentre study in France in patients with solid tumours (the ZOHé study). BMC Cancer.2018; 18: 1127.
40.
GasconPKrendyukovAMathiesonN, et al.Extrapolation in practice: lessons from 10 years with biosimilar filgrastim. BioDrugs2019; 33: 635–645.
41.
AaproMKrendyukovAHöbelN,et al.Development and 10-year history of a biosimilar: the example of Binocrit®. Ther Adv Med Oncol2018; 10: 1758835918768419.
Tabernero J, Vyas M, Giuliani R, et al. Biosimilars: a position paper of the European Society for Medical Oncology, with particular reference to oncology prescribers. ESMO Open 2016; 1: 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1136/esmoopen-2016-000142.
49.
MoorkensEVultoAGHuysI, et al.Policies for biosimilar uptake in Europe: an overview. PLoS One2017; 12: e0190147.
50.
LymanGHBalabanEDiazM, et al.American Society of clinical oncology statement: biosimilars in oncology. J Clin Oncol. Apr20 2018; 36: 1260–1265.
51.
AladulMIFitzpatrickRWChapmanSR. Differences in UK healthcare professionals’ knowledge, attitude and practice towards infliximab and insulin glargine biosimilars. Int J Pharm Pract2019; 27: 214–217.
52.
KarateevDBelokonevaN. Evaluation of physicians’ knowledge and attitudes towards biosimilars in Russia and issues associated with their prescribing. Biomolecules. 2019; 9(2): 1–14. doi:10.3390/biom9020057.
53.
NultyDD. The adequacy of response rates to online and paper surveys: what can be done?Assess Eval High Educ2008; 33: 301–314.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
