Download - [SAMPLE] Specialty Physicians Discuss Their Opinions of the United States Biosimilars Market
Specialty Physicians Discuss Their Opinions of
the United States Biosimilars Market
Insights into the
Potential Reactions of Key Customers and Influence on Market Uptake
December 2011
NA7B-52
NA7B-52 2
Contents
Section Slide Numbers
Executive Summary 3
Introduction 5
Physician Prescribing Behavior 14
Customer Purchasing Behavior 29
Regulatory Environment 44
Biosimilar Manufacturers 55
About Frost & Sullivan 70
NA7B-52 3
Executive Summary
• The arrival of biosimilars, or highly similar copies of biopharmaceutical products, to the U.S.
market is imminent. Although they have been available elsewhere—including Europe—for
several years, physicians and other key stakeholders in the United States have only recently
begun to anticipate their arrival.
• This panel discussion was conducted to preview the thoughts and expectations of specialty
physicians who would be expected to be among the first customers of biosimilars, with the
objective of gaining insight into some of the major factors that could influence market uptake.
• Based on this representative sample of physicians, the overall adoption of biosimilars can be
expected to experience widespread uptake in light of anticipated access to comparable
therapeutic options at a lower cost versus high-cost biologics. Main factors with the potential
to influence the rate and extent of uptake include cost, safety and efficacy data including
testing in specific patient populations, and reputation of the manufacturer.
• Potential skepticism may be overcome with the help of convincing noninferiority clinical data
for products from reputable companies highly experienced with biologics. Educational
programs deemed to be unbiased that convey this data could help increase awareness and
boost physician confidence in biosimilar products.
Source: Frost & Sullivan analysis.
NA7B-52 4
Introduction
Frost & Sullivan assessed physicians’ willingness to prescribe biosimilars in the
United States.
The objective of this research was to conduct a highly qualitative analysis of a
representative sample of practicing specialty physicians in the United States in the
spirit of an interactive roundtable discussion.
The primary goal was to encourage participants to freely express their opinions and
ideas around all aspects of a topic, facilitating a free exchange about how biosimilars
will impact their practice and the overall U.S. healthcare market.
This research was not intended to produce quantitative data.
Objective
Source: Frost & Sullivan Biosimilar Discussion Board, Fourth Quarter 2011.
NA7B-52 5
Methodology
Methodology
Participants
The biosimilar research panel consisted of 20 preselected participants and was
conducted via online moderated discussion boards over a three-day period (October
11-13, 2011). A series of questions was asked on current topics of interest to specialty
physicians as well as pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies. Questions and
discussions were designed to gauge both short-term and long-term trends and
impacts.
The panel consisted of 20 specialty physicians: seven oncologists, seven
rheumatologists, and six hematologists. Panel participants were randomly selected from
a pool of prescreened, qualified candidates and mainly represented hospitals and
independent practices across the United States. Selection of specialty practices was
based on the therapy area of those biosimilar agents anticipated to enter the U.S. market
in the foreseeable future.
Source: Frost & Sullivan Biosimilar Discussion Board, Fourth Quarter 2011.
NA7B-52 6
Topics and Themes
Biosimilars Panel–Fourth Quarter 2011
Physician Prescribing Behavior
• Perceptions and Adoption Potential
• Patient Types
• Medical Education
Customer Purchasing Behavior
• Patient Preferences
• Clinical Trial Recruitment
• Anticipated Payer Perspective
Regulatory Environment
• Awareness of Regulatory Issues
• Clinical Trial Design
• Label Requirements
Manufacturers
• Company Awareness
• Company Perceptions
• Geographic Influence
Source: Frost & Sullivan Biosimilar Discussion Board, Fourth Quarter 2011.
NA7B-52 7
Physician Prescribing Behavior: Questions Posed to the
Panel
• How did you first hear about biosimilars?
• What is your overall willingness to prescribe biosimilars?
o What would be the top three factors impacting your decision to prescribe a biosimilar?
o What are your concerns? What is the most important concern? Why?
• How do you think these concerns can be overcome?
• Which patient types would you be most comfortable prescribing a biosimilar
[please specify in terms of experienced patient versus naïve/new patient,
disease severity (mild/moderate/severe), treatment goals (curative versus
palliative), age, other]? Why?
o In general, what is the percentage of naïve versus experienced patients that you treat?
• When do you envision this will start to pick up traction and have larger market
uptake? Why?
• Assuming biosimilars are not substitutable, please explain the process of how
you would approach this subject with the patients, e.g. wait for them to ask,
offer them choices, prescribe brand or biosimilar first.
Source: Frost & Sullivan Biosimilar Discussion Board, Fourth Quarter 2011.
NA7B-52 8
Physician Prescribing Behavior: Questions Posed to the
Panel (continued)
Source: Frost & Sullivan Biosimilar Discussion Board, Fourth Quarter 2011.
• How would you define a biobetter?
o What is your opinion of biobetters?
o Would there be greater comfort in prescribing a biobetter versus a biosimilar?
Versus a branded product? Why?
• Would education programs help make you feel less hesitant to prescribe
biosimilars?
o What types of education programs would you like to see and for whom (doctors,
patients, payers, pharmacists, etc.)?
o What would you look for in an education program?
o What delivery formats for new drug information do you trust/use the most:
(spontaneously, then probe: manufacturer’s Web site, online medical information
provider, by a physician-peer, by a pharmaceutical sales representative, paper-
based brochures, mobile applications, by a third-party sales organization)?
NA7B-52 9
• What percentage of your patients generally prefers branded drugs over
generic drugs? Do you expect similar results with biosimilars versus branded
drugs? Why or why not?
• Would you enroll a patient to participate in a biosimilar clinical trial in the
United States if the branded drug is available to treat them? Why or why not?
• Do you foresee recruitment issues in general for biosimilar trials? If so, how
do you feel these issues could be overcome?
• What concerns do you anticipate from your patients if they are prescribed a
biosimilar? What would you likely do to ease these concerns?
o What types of help would you like to have from the industry or manufacturers to
address patient concerns and why?
• What do you think the discount will be for biosimilars versus branded drugs
and why?
o Do you think this will be enough to sway patients to take a biosimilar versus a
branded drug? If not, what do you feel the discount would need to be to start
appealing to patients?
Customer Purchasing Behavior: Questions Posed to the
Panel
Source: Frost & Sullivan Biosimilar Discussion Board, Fourth Quarter 2011.
NA7B-52 10
•What reimbursement rate do you expect going forward with biosimilars? Do
you expect a high cost for physicians and/or patients? Why or why not?
•What concerns do you foresee with payers including biosimilars on their
formularies and why?
•What reimbursement timeline (from prescription to being reimbursed) would be
appropriate for your practice and why?
oWould a faster reimbursement turnaround for a biosimilar versus
innovator product (due to lesser cost for the payer) lead you to prescribe
one over the other? Why or why not?
Customer Purchasing Behavior: Questions Posed to the
Panel (continued)
Source: Frost & Sullivan Biosimilar Discussion Board, Fourth Quarter 2011.
NA7B-52 11
Customer Purchasing Behavior: Key Findings
Cost
• Biosimilars are expected to be priced from 30 percent to 50 percent below their
branded counterparts.
• Payers are expected to consider the cost benefit alone when updating
formularies.
• Financial incentives passed along from payer to physician will likely have a
strong influence on some, but not all, physicians.
• Immediate and long-term financial benefits for patients and the healthcare
system in general is thought to be enough incentive to participate in biosimilar
clinical trials.
Brand Perception
According to the panel, adoption of biosimilars by payers and patients is expected to be influenced mainly
by cost, with brand perception playing a secondary role for patients.
• It appears that the majority of patients are mainly influenced by financial
incentives and generally prefer generic drugs to higher-priced branded drugs.
• This trend is expected to carry over to biosimilars, but may depend on patients’
perceptions of biologics versus conventional drugs.
Source: Frost & Sullivan Analysis.
NA7B-52 12
Customer Purchasing Behavior Most patients prefer low-cost generics over brand-name drugs
Key Takeaways:
“About 75 percent of my patients have no preference, 10 percent will want the branded medications only and
15 percent will ask if there was a generic they would prefer it for economic reasons; I suspect this will be the
same with biosimilars as long as the patient has to contribute some funds. If both are fully covered without a
differential co-pay, the majority will want branded medications.” (Oncologist, Michigan)
“Currently, I see a shift toward generics due to lower co-pays, for pills. I doubt that this will be the same for
biologics, since patients consider them „very strong‟ and they may be afraid to use a generic.”
(Rheumatologist, New York)
“I have not encountered that situation. Patients are quite comfortable with generics particularly when there
are significant price differences. I expect patients to be reasonably comfortable with generic biosimilars.”
(Rheumatologist, Pennsylvania)
• While physicians report patient preferences ranging from most prefer branded drugs to lower cost
generics, the most common response leaned toward patient preference for the lower-cost option.
• Physicians were divided as to how well this attitude will translate to biosimilars. Factors that may
influence patient preference are out-of-pocket costs and perceptions of biologics versus
conventional drugs.
• Many physicians report that their patients do not have personal preference but rather rely on their
advice.
Selected Quotes:
Source: Frost & Sullivan Biosimilar Discussion Board, Fourth Quarter 2011.
NA7B-52 13
Customer Purchasing Behavior: Recommendations Strong clinical data needed to alter perceptions of potential inferiority
Source: Frost & Sullivan Analysis.
Recommendations
• Clear explanation of the financial
advantages of developing a biosimilar,
coupled with strong clinical data to
support noninferiority, may help to
improve any negative perceptions of
biosimilars.
Rationale
• Patients may perceive biologics, as
opposed to biosimilars, as superior
products simply due to their cost, as
many people associate price with
quality.
• Positive clinical data from well-
designed clinical trials may also
increase the confidence level of
physicians and help alleviate the
concern of being forced to prescribe
an inferior product.
NA7B-52 14
Regulatory Environment: Questions Posed to the Panel
• Regarding the FDA discussion over the approval pathway for biosimilars,
which topics are most interesting for you? Why?
o How do you expect this to play out?
• When do you expect to see the first biosimilar launch in the United States?
o When is the soonest a biosimilar could launch? Please provide best-case and
worst-case scenario. Why?
o What do you think is the number-one FDA concern that is delaying this process?
• What data would you like to see reviewed by regulatory agents before
prescribing a biosimilar to a patient?
o What type of clinical trial(s) would you like to see conducted prior to approval?
Please specify in terms of trial size, trial design (i.e., randomized, open-label versus
blinded, etc.), duration of treatment period and follow-up period, and number of trials
per drug.
• What would you like the biosimilars’ label to include (e.g., interchangeability)?
o What must the label include at a minimum?
Source: Frost & Sullivan Biosimilar Discussion Board, Fourth Quarter 2011.
NA7B-52 15
Biosimilar Manufacturers: Questions Posed to the Panel
• Which companies are you aware of that are developing a biosimilar for the
United States market?
o How did you first learn about these companies and their involvement in biosimilars?
• Overall, what is your opinion of each of these companies?
o How do you feel about them developing a biosimilar product for the United States
market and why?
o What is your comfort level with each of the companies listed?
o What types of companies do you trust most and why?
• What do you generally take into consideration when evaluating companies
developing a biosimilar? What is most important to you and why?
o Do you feel the location of where a biosimilar is developed or manufactured is an
important consideration? Why or why not?
Source: Frost & Sullivan Biosimilar Discussion Board, Fourth Quarter 2011.
NA7B-52 16
Biosimilar Manufacturers: Questions Posed to the Panel
(continued)
• In February 2011, Fujifilm Holdings Corporation bought two units of Merck &
Co. that make biopharmaceuticals (to target growth in the healthcare industry
and make up for declining sales in cameras and film). Samsung also plans to
go into the biosimilars manufacturing business through its partnership with
Quintiles. Overall, what is your opinion about outlier companies such as
Fujifilm and Samsung investing in biosimilars? Do you expect these
companies to have a place in the United States market? Why or why not?
• Which companies/biosimilars do you think will be most successful in the
United States market and why?
Source: Frost & Sullivan Biosimilar Discussion Board, Fourth Quarter 2011.
NA7B-52 18
Who is Frost & Sullivan
Frost & Sullivan, the Growth Partnership Company, enables clients to accelerate growth and
achieve best-in-class positions in growth, innovation and leadership. The company's Growth
Partnership Service provides the CEO and the CEO's Growth Team with disciplined
research and best-practice models to drive the generation, evaluation, and implementation
of powerful growth strategies. Frost & Sullivan leverages 50 years of experience in
partnering with Global 1000 companies, emerging businesses and the investment
community from more than 40 offices on six continents.
To join our Growth Partnership, please visit http://www.frost.com.
NA7B-52 19
What Makes Us Unique
All services aligned on growth to help clients develop and implement
innovative growth strategies
Continuous monitoring of industries and their convergence, giving clients first
mover advantage in emerging opportunities
More than 40 global offices ensure that clients gain global perspective to
mitigate risk and sustain long term growth
Proprietary TEAM Methodology integrates 7 critical research perspectives to
optimize growth investments
Career research and case studies for the CEOs’ Growth Team to ensure
growth strategy implementation at best practice levels
Close collaboration with clients in developing their research based visionary
perspective to drive GIL
Focused on Growth
Industry Coverage
Global Footprint
Career Best Practices
360 Degree Perspective
Visionary Innovation Partner
NA7B-52 20
TEAM Methodology
Frost & Sullivan’s proprietary TEAM Methodology ensures that clients have a complete 360 Degree
PerspectiveTM from which to drive decision making. Technical, Econometric, Application, and Market
information ensures that clients have a comprehensive view of industries, markets, and technology.
Technical
Real-time intelligence on technology, including emerging technologies, new
R&D breakthroughs, technology forecasting, impact analysis, groundbreaking
research, and licensing opportunities.
Econometric
In-depth qualitative and quantitative research focused on timely and critical
global, regional, and country-specific trends, including the political,
demographic, and socioeconomic landscapes.
Application
Insightful strategies, networking opportunities, and best practices that can be
applied for enhanced market growth; interactions between the client, peers,
and Frost & Sullivan representatives that result in added value and
effectiveness.
Market
Global and regional market analysis, including drivers and restraints, market
trends, regulatory changes, competitive insights, growth forecasts, industry
challenges, strategic recommendations, and end-user perspectives.