Adam Colborn, JD, director of government relations at the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy (AMCP), also explains what health systems can do to improve patient access to biosimilars.
"The absence of interchangeability in the biosimilar market really is a pretty big obstacle for patients and pharmacists who are trying to dispense them," said Adam Colborn, JD, director of government relations at the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy (AMCP).
Transcript
How does the regulatory landscape of biosimilars vary between states?
Biosimilar regulation doesn't really vary too much between states. I think the clear overarching trend is a deference to federal authority and FDA assignment of interchangeability.
All states, except Hawaii, specifically incorporate federal statutory law into their biosimilar substitution and interchangeability laws. Often they include references to the Orange Book or the Purple Book, and so there's not a ton of variety between states. They don't necessarily all use the Orange Book or the Purple Book, or sometimes they cite to slightly different parts of the US Code, but for the most part they're pretty aligned on that. Hawaii, like I said, is the exception. They maintain their own state level list of interchangeable drugs that governs substitution in the state.
I think a uniform nationwide approach to biosimilars is preferable to a patchwork of state-level regulations, but I think the federal obstacles to interchangeability and biosimilar substitution leave a lot of room for improvement.
How can interchangeability pose as a barrier in the biosimilars market?
The absence of interchangeability in the biosimilar market really is a pretty big obstacle for patients and pharmacists who are trying to dispense them. There's a much higher regulatory benchmark for a biosimilar to receive an interchangeable designation than a small molecule drug.
Biosimilars have to, one, demonstrate that they are highly similar to the originator product, but they also have to demonstrate certain levels of potency, of purity, and then safety, as well. When we compare that to small molecule drugs, small molecule drugs only have to demonstrate that they are bioequivalent to the brand name. They have to have the same potency of the active ingredient over the same amount of time, which is much easier to do.
Until we get that interchangeable designation, we won't see pharmacists who are able to substitute biosimilars at the pharmacy counter for brand name prescriptions for the originator product. That could potentially result in patients having to pay higher costs than they would if they could access the biosimilar product. Taking a step back to the plan and benefit level, it also limits plans' ability to use traditional utilization management techniques, such as step edits, because if they're not interchangeable, you can't start with the biosimilar product in the first tier and then step up to the brand name. So, those are some pretty big obstacles to increased utilization of biosimilars due to the lack of a convenient interchangeability process.
What role do health systems play in the fight for improved biosimilar legislation and policies?
I think what would be most useful is for direct patient care providers, like doctors or nurses, to leverage their expertise with policy makers and say that this is something that will benefit their patients.
Pharmacy groups have been engaged in this for a long time, but we're really not seeing the same level [with direct care providers], and I think that mostly comes down to a lack of familiarity with the idea of biosimilars among a lot of direct care providers.
I think hospital groups and hospitals can get involved in this as well—more voices are always helpful. But the provider perspective is really influential and really powerful with policy makers. So I think that would be what's most helpful for improving patient access to biosimilars.
What's at Stake as Oral Arguments Are Presented in the Braidwood Case? Q&A With Richard Hughes IV
April 21st 2025Richard Hughes IV, JD, MPH, spoke about the upcoming oral arguments to be presented to the Supreme Court regarding the Braidwood case, which would determine how preventive services are guaranteed insurance coverage.
Read More
New Research Challenges Assumptions About Hospital-Physician Integration, Medicare Patient Mix
April 22nd 2025On this episode of Managed Care Cast, Brady Post, PhD, lead author of a study published in the April 2025 issue of The American Journal of Managed Care®, challenges the claim that hospital-employed physicians serve a more complex patient mix.
Listen
Orca-T showed lower rates of graft-vs-host disease or infection compared with allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) or acute leukemias in the Precision-T trial, Caspian Oliai, MD, MS, UCLA Bone Marrow Transplantation Stem Cell Processing Center, said.
Read More
Personalized Care Key as Tirzepatide Use Expands Rapidly
April 15th 2025Using commercial insurance claims data and the US launch of tirzepatide as their dividing point, John Ostrominski, MD, Harvard Medical School, and his team studied trends in the use of both glucose-lowering and weight-lowering medications, comparing outcomes between adults with and without type 2 diabetes.
Listen
What the Updated Telephone Consumer Protection Act Rules Mean for Health Care Messaging
April 4th 2025As new Federal Communications Commission rules take effect April 11, 2025, mPulse CEO Bob Farrell explains how health organizations can stay compliant while building patient trust through transparency and personalized engagement.
Read More
High-Impact Trials at ACC.25 Signal Shift in Chronic Disease Treatment
April 4th 2025Experts highlight groundbreaking research presented at the American College of Cardiology Annual Scientific Session (ACC.25), which emphasized a shift toward more personalized, evidence-based treatment strategies.
Read More