Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33306186›Full record

ArticleBioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy2021

A Look at the History of Biosimilar Adoption: Characteristics of Early and Late Adopters of Infliximab and Etanercept Biosimilars in Subregions of England, Scotland and Wales - A Mixed Methods Study.

Evelien Moorkens, Arnold G Vulto, James Kent, Lindsay McClure, Richard Boldero, Thibault Vanhove, Steven Simoens, Isabelle Huys

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Demand- Versus Supply-Side Policies in Market Penetration of Biosimilars: Which is More Effective?BioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy · 2025
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Evelien MoorkensDepartment of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9570-470X
Arnold G VultoDepartment of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. a.vulto@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8439-2800
James KentSpecialist Pharmacy Service, NHS England, London, UK.
Lindsay McClureNHS National Services Scotland, Edinburgh, UK.
Richard BolderoAll Wales Therapeutics and Toxicology Centre, NHS Wales, Cardiff, UK.
Thibault VanhoveAZ Sint-Maarten, Mechelen, Belgium.
Steven SimoensDepartment of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9512-2005
Isabelle HuysDepartment of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4738-8298

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRegions within England, Scotland and Wales show variation in rate of adoption of biosimilar infliximab and etanercept.

objectivesThis study aims to examine how local decisions and practices in regions within England, Scotland and Wales might explain initial variation in market dynamics of biosimilar and originator infliximab and etanercept.

methodsMarket data provided by the National Health Service (NHS) on biosimilar and originator infliximab and etanercept uptake were analysed for the 10 historical regions of England, 14 health boards in Scotland and 7 health boards in Wales (2015-2018). Findings were discussed in ten semi-structured interviews: on a national level with an industry representative (1), on a regional level with NHS employees in England (6), Scotland (1) and Wales (1), and on a local level with a representative of a clinical commissioning group in England (1).

resultsTenders for infliximab and etanercept in England, Scotland and Wales have consistently resulted in a biosimilar as the best value biological. Early and late biosimilar adopters are seen, with overall convergence towards high biosimilar market shares over time. Qualitative results suggest that biosimilar adoption was positively influenced by (a) a price difference between biosimilar and originator product making it worthwhile to switch patients; (b) a good relationship between commissioner and provider in England resulting in gain share agreements; (c) leadership on biosimilars in regional NHS offices in England or Scottish and Welsh health boards; (d) key opinion leaders or leading hospitals that start using biosimilars early and gain experience.

conclusionsThis study has shown that the savings potential drives biosimilar use. Regions with a proactive attitude, good stakeholder relationships, and clinician engagement were identified as early adopters.

Indexed as

Biosimilar PharmaceuticalsEnglandEtanerceptHumansInfliximabScotlandState MedicineWalesBiosimilar PharmaceuticalsEtanerceptInfliximab

Identifiers

PMID33306186
PMCPMC7803694

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.