Biosimilars in paediatric inflammatory bowel disease

Frequency and clinical significance of histologic upper gastrointestinal tract findings in children with inflammatory bowel disease

OBJECTIVE

Assessment of the upper gastrointestinal tract (UGI) may enable more personalized treatment strategies in pediatric inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). However, data on the frequency and significance of these findings remain limited.

METHODS

Data on 132 pediatric IBD patients with systematic UGI sampling were collected and the baseline characteristics and presence of complications compared between those with and without histological UGI findings. The control group comprised 162 children who received no diagnoses.

RESULTS

Seventy-six children had ulcerative colitis (UC), 47 Crohn's disease (CD) and nine IBD unclassified. UGI findings were more common in IBD patients than controls (69.7% vs. 30.9%, respectively, p < .001), particularly in the stomach (62.1% vs. 16.8%; p < .001). Among IBD patients, findings were more common in CD than in UC (80.9% vs. 63.2%; p = .038), particularly in the duodenum (21.3% vs. 2.6%, p = .001). Four patients had UGI granulomas consistent with CD. Hypoalbuminemia (OR 3.22; 95% CI 1.18-8.79) and failure to thrive (2.82; 1.17-6.78) increased the likelihood of UGI findings in IBD. In CD, perianal morbidity was less common in those with than in those without UGI findings (13.2% vs. 44.4%; p = .032) whereas in UC, UGI findings increased the risk for co-morbidities (18.8% vs. 3.6%; p = .059). The long-term outcomes did not differ between patients with or without UGI findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Histologic UGI findings were more common in children with IBD than in children with no gastrointestinal diagnoses. In CD, UGI findings were more frequent than in UC, especially in the duodenum. In UC, UGI findings were associated with more complex disease.

The biosimilar pathway in the USA: An analysis of the innovator company and biosimilar company perspectives and beyond

In order to improve access to costly biological treatments, a biosimilar pathway in the United States of America (USA) was enacted under the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (BPCI Act) of 2009. The aim of the present study was to investigate how the health policy, the establishment of the biosimilar pathway, influenced related companies by studying their respective perspectives and strategies revealed in literatures and publicly available resources. Perspectives of companies reveal the points of concern for the biosimilar pathway, such as data requirements, patents, interchangeability, naming, and exclusivity. Innovator companies may utilize expedited programs for serious conditions, enhance patent protection, launch programs for life-cycle extension, and develop biosimilars as well. The biosimilar companies overcoming technical barriers might need to gather convincing evidence to facilitate market penetration as well as to distinguish their products from those of other biosimilar competitors. More challenges are expected for innovator companies if international harmonization takes place, which might be worth further investigation.

Perspectives of Hospital Pharmacists Towards Biosimilar Medicines: A Survey of Polish Pharmacy Practice in General Hospitals

INTRODUCTION

There has been a significant increase in the volume of biosimilar medicines recently due to the expiries of patent protections of biologic medicines. Biosimilars are considered new medicines, and their usage in therapy is often associated with uncertainty from the perspectives of physicians, pharmacists and patients.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to identify hospital pharmacist opinions towards these new medicines and investigate their usage in practice.

METHODS

A paper-based, self-administered questionnaire was distributed to Polish hospital pharmacists.

RESULTS

Biosimilars were used in 77% of surveyed hospitals, whereas originator biologics were utilised within 90% of settings. The former medicines were found to consist of less than one-third of the entire course of biological pharmacotherapy used within Polish hospitals. A total of 88% of hospital pharmacists were concerned that the new drugs were not identical with the biologic versions, 48% with their immunogenicity and 44% with other pharmacokinetic properties. The majority of respondents (87%) stated that the most important advantage of biosimilars related to decreased costs. Furthermore, according to participants, pharmacist-led substitution is not appropriate.

CONCLUSION

Due to the numerous concerns relating to the usage of biosimilars, their introduction into patient therapy requires special attention from healthcare providers. While pharmacists involved in the distribution of biosimilars are conscious of their impact in decreasing costs of therapy, they do not feel comfortable in recommending their substitution without a physician's permission. There is a need for more precise legal regulations relating to biosimilars, improved communication between physicians and pharmacists, as well as educational initiatives to improve the safe and effective usage of biosimilars.