MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400378609 · doi:10.51731/cjht.2024.927

National and International Policies on the Use of Biosimilars: An Environmental Scan

2024· article· en· W4400378609 on OpenAlex
J. Kim, Jessica Arias, Scott Gavura

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Health Technologies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicBiosimilars and Bioanalytical Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiosimilarEnvironmental policyBusinessMedicineEnvironmental planningEnvironmental scienceInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Biosimilars are biologic drugs that are highly similar to their reference biologics that were already authorized for sale. Interchangeability is a term used to describe when 1 drug can be exchanged for another and is expected to have the same clinical effect. Interchangeability may allow 1 medicine to be substituted for another at the time of dispensing (automatic substitution). However, the decision to allow automatic substitution is made by each jurisdiction according to its own regulations. Interchangeability of a reference biologic (the originator product) and a biosimilar is a designation in the US and Finland. The US, France, Germany, Norway, and Australia allow automatic substitution between reference biologics and biosimilars, whereas other countries do not. Interchangeability is limited to select products in the US and Australia. The countries included in this Environmental Scan (N = 13) endorse starting patients who have not yet received treatment on a biosimilar. Switching between reference biologics and biosimilars is generally allowed in all the countries included in this review; however, many jurisdictions prefer switching be clinician led with ongoing clinical monitoring of patients. Practices such as target setting, quotas, and financial incentives, as well as guidelines and recommendations for prescription of biosimilars, can be effective ways to encourage biosimilar use. Mandatory switching is also implemented in 11 Canadian jurisdictions. Extrapolation is the regulatory and scientific process of granting a clinical indication to a medicine without clinical efficacy and safety data to support that indication. Extrapolation of indications for reference biologics to biosimilars is reasonable, provided several factors are comparable: mechanism of action across indications, pharmacokinetics and biodistribution, safety, immunogenicity, and other factors that affect the safety and efficacy for each indication and patient population. Pricing and procurement practices vary internationally. Some countries implement policies controlling the list price of a biosimilar (and its reference drug less commonly) at the time of biosimilar launch. Pricing policies include a free-pricing policy (i.e., manufacturers are free to set the price of biosimilars) and mandatory price reductions. Tendering is the most common practice in procurement to achieve lower prices and to increase biosimilar uptakes in 8 countries reviewed in this Environmental Scan. Biosimilar-related policies and markets are rapidly evolving, so recent changes might have not been fully captured in this Environmental Scan. Therefore, caution is required in interpreting the findings.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.881
Threshold uncertainty score0.262

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.114
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.218 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it