Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Apr;26(4):410-416.
doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2020.26.4.410.

Process and Clinical Outcomes of a Biosimilar Adoption Program with Infliximab-Dyyb

Affiliations

Process and Clinical Outcomes of a Biosimilar Adoption Program with Infliximab-Dyyb

Shubha Bhat et al. J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2020 Apr.

Abstract

Background: In 2016, the FDA approved infliximab-dyyb (IFX-dyyb) as a biosimilar to infliximab (IFX). Deemed to have comparable efficacy and safety to IFX, IFX-dyyb is 20%-30% less expensive, allowing significant cost savings for institutions and some payers. In 2018, IFX was reported to be the drug with the highest spend since 2013, costing $3.8 billion; however, transition to IFX-dyyb would save $1.1 billion. Regardless, many institutions have not transitioned to IFX-dyyb or other IFX biosimilars (e.g., IFX-abda) because of concerns about clinical outcomes, uncertainty regarding financial impact, and barriers to operationalizing biosimilar adoption. At Boston Medical Center, a decision was made in March 2018 to adopt IFX-dyyb and transition patients who have been on IFX for ≥ 6 months for all indications to IFX-dyyb.

Objectives: To (a) describe a biosimilar adoption process of IFX-dyyb in patients on IFX for ≥ 6 months; (b) characterize cost savings of transitioning patients to IFX-dyyb; and (c) evaluate real-world clinical outcomes of adult patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) who transitioned to IFX-dyyb.

Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study of patients eligible for the IFX-dyyb switch from March 2018 to June 2019 at a large academic medical center. For process outcomes, we collected the proportion of patients who transitioned to IFX-dyyb and calculated the cost savings generated. To assess clinical outcomes of adult IBD patients who transitioned, we collected IFX and IFX-dyyb dosage, Harvey Bradshaw Index (HBI) or Simple Clinical Colitis Activity Index (SCCAI) scores, c-reactive protein (CRP) levels, and colonoscopy results. Descriptive statistics, Wilcoxon signed-rank test, and McNemar's test were used for statistical analyses.

Results: Of 151 eligible patients, 146 (97%) successfully transitioned to IFX-dyyb. Based on our conversion rate to IFX-dyyb, our health system is forecasted to save approximately $500,000 annually. From March to June 2018, 63 of 75 (84%) eligible IBD patients transitioned from IFX to IFX-dyyb. In this cohort, of the 40 patients with HBI or SCCAI scores before and after transition, 36 (90%) maintained remission. For 32 patients, the mean CRP (SD) before transition was 11.2 (22) and 4.1 (4.8) after transition (P = 0.09). Since the IFX-dyyb transition, 9 patients had a colonoscopy, of which 5 (56%) were in endoscopic remission. As of October 2018, 56 (89%) patients continued with IFX-dyyb after transition. Of the 46 patients who had 12-15 months posttransition data, 38 (83%) remained on IFX-dyyb.

Conclusions: Implementation of a biosimilar adoption program can be successful and result in significant cost savings without compromising clinical outcomes. A model that uses actionable strategies and embraces collaboration among stakeholders is described here, with outcomes demonstrating successful IFX-dyyb uptake and no changes in clinical outcomes of transitioned adult patients with IBD.

Disclosures: No outside funding supported this study. Farraye reports advisory board fees from Janssen, Merck, and Pfizer. Shah reports speaker fees from Pfizer. The other authors have nothing to disclose.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

No outside funding supported this study. Farraye reports advisory board fees from Janssen, Merck, and Pfizer. Shah reports speaker fees from Pfizer. The other authors have nothing to disclose.

References

    1. Schumock GT, Stubbings J, Wiest MD, et al. . National trends in prescription drug expenditures and projections for 2018. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2018;75(14):1023-38. - PubMed
    1. Kaida-Yip F, Deshpande K, Saran T, Vyas D. Biosimilars: review of current applications, obstacles, and their future in medicine. World J Clin Cases. 2018;6(8):161-16. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Mulcahy AW, Hlavka JP, Case SP. Biosimilar cost savings in the United States: initial experience and future potential. Rand Health Q. 2018;7(4):3. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Feagan BG, Lam G, Ma C, Lichtenstein GR. Systematic review: efficacy and safety of switching patients between reference and biosimilar infliximab. Ailment Pharamcol Ther. 2019;49(1):31-40. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Jorgensen KK, Olsen IC, Goll GL, et al. . Switching from originator infliximab to biosimilar CT-P13 compared with maintained treatment with originator infliximab (NOR-SWITCH): a 52-week, randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority trial. Lancet. 2017;389(10086):2304-16. - PubMed

MeSH terms