What do the guidelines say about use of biosimilar insulin therapy? Simple practical considerations to guide clinicians in different patient subgroups—Sharing Canadian perspectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The rising cost of insulins are significantly impacting health care expenditure, thereby limiting access to treatment for more people affected by diabetes. Fear and misunderstanding of insulin therapy have worsened with the emergence of biosimilar insulins. Biosimilars are not the same as generic medications. Generic medication contains identical ingredients to the reference, whereas biosimilar medication is highly comparable but not necessarily identical to the reference. RESULTS: There are five biosimilar insulins currently available in Canada: insulin glargine (U-100) as the biosimilar insulins, Basaglar® and Semglee®, insulin lispro (U-100) as the biosimilar insulin, Admelog® and insulin aspart (U-100) as the biosimilar insulins, Trurapi® and Kirsty ™. Recent clinical trials have demonstrated comparable efficacy, safety and immunogenicity for biosimilar insulins compared with reference insulins. The dosing of biosimilar insulins is also the same as the reference for initiating, switching (1:1) and titrating. Regulatory agencies, payors and clinical practice guideline committees are initiating biosimilar initiatives aimed at reducing costs, impacting more patients worldwide. While few studies have evaluated biosimilar insulin use in a real-world clinical practice setting, the descriptive patterns retrieved from the LMC Diabetes Registry reflect the Ontario Ministry of Health's changes in biologic drug policy that were implemented to promote the use of biosimilar insulins. CONCLUSION: Many health care providers are largely unfamiliar with biosimilar insulins. This limits the acceptance of biosimilar insulins by patients, as it is related to the comfort of health care providers in educating patients. Tailoring effective conversations to patient needs ensures the best possible therapeutic outcomes. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: This review article intends to review the efficacy and safety data from pivotal clinical trials with biosimilar insulins, as well as the regulatory and health economic considerations which underpin the safe and cost-effective use of biosimilar insulin therapy. Biosimilars are not the same as generic medications. Generic medication contains identical ingredients to the reference, whereas biosimilar medication is highly comparable but not necessarily identical to the reference. There are five biosimilar insulins currently available in Canada: insulin glargine (U-100) as the biosimilar insulins, Basaglar® and Semglee®, insulin lispro (U-100) as the biosimilar insulin, Admelog® and insulin aspart (U-100) as the biosimilar insulins, Trurapi® and Kirsty™. Data for biosimilars must be submitted in a stepwise approach to demonstrate similarity to the reference biologic under the following categories: structure & function, human clinical trials, comparative studies evaluating efficacy and safety and manufacturing quality control. Recent clinical trials have demonstrated comparable efficacy, safety and immunogenicity for biosimilar insulins compared with reference insulins. The dosing of biosimilar insulins is also the same as the reference for initiating, switching (1:1) and titrating. Health care providers are encouraged to stay up to date on the latest guidelines and recommendations regarding biosimilar insulin interchangeability to ensure safe and cost-effective use of these products. Regulatory agencies, payors and clinical practice guideline committees are initiating biosimilar initiatives aimed at reducing costs, impacting more patients worldwide. While few studies have evaluated biosimilar insulin use in a real-world clinical practice setting, the descriptive patterns retrieved from the LMC Diabetes Registry reflect the Ontario Ministry of Health's changes in biologic drug policy that were implemented to promote the use of biosimilar insulins. A summary of adults with diabetes from this registry showed 3.8% of individuals with T1D were prescribed Basaglar® before April 2023 compared to 12.0% after January 2024. For the T2D cohort, the use of basal biosimilar insulins, Basaglar® and Semglee®, similarly increased by approximately 10% and 2% after January 2024, respectively. The use of bolus biosimilar insulins also increased after January 2024 by approximately 28% in the T1D cohort and 60% in the T2D cohort using insulin therapy. Many health care providers are largely unfamiliar with biosimilar insulins. This limits the acceptance of biosimilar insulins by patients, as it is related to the comfort of health care providers in educating patients. People living with diabetes must have access to safe and effective treatment options, and they should be able to obtain appropriate medications at an affordable price and in a fair and timely manner.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.089 | 0.246 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.012 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.025 | 0.024 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".