Background and Aim: The aim of this survey was to find out the patients' perspectives concerning biosimilars. Methods: An online survey consisting of 14 questions was made available between November 2014 and October 2015. Only respondents who had heard of biosimilars were asked to respond the final twelve questions. Results: A total of 1181 patients responded. Of these, 38% had heard of biosimilars. The respondents worried about biosimilars' safety profile [47.0%], efficacy [40.3%], and molecular basis [35.0%]. Only 25.2% of the respondents had no concerns about biosimilars. Just over half [55.9%] of the respondents thought that the lower cost of the biosimilars should not come before their safety and efficacy. Only 12.5% of respondents felt that extrapolation made sense. The survey showed that 39.9% felt that patients should be systematically informed, and 26.7% felt that patient associations should be informed and able to give their opinions. It also revealed that 20.9% of the respondents would be against the idea of interchangeability if the patient was not aware 65.7% of the respondents would want to know whether they were receiving the reference drug or the biosimilar, and have all necessary information in writing before the drug was administered. Only 31.0% of the respondents would be fully confident about biosimilars, even if they were prescribed and explained by the treating physician. Conclusions: Most patients were not familiar with biosimilars, and those who were had doubts and concerns about the biosimilars' safety and efficacy. The patients wished to be informed and involved in decision-making concerning biosimilars.

Patient Perspectives on Biosimilars: A Survey by the European Federation of Crohn's and Ulcerative Colitis Associations

Danese S;
2017-01-01

Abstract

Background and Aim: The aim of this survey was to find out the patients' perspectives concerning biosimilars. Methods: An online survey consisting of 14 questions was made available between November 2014 and October 2015. Only respondents who had heard of biosimilars were asked to respond the final twelve questions. Results: A total of 1181 patients responded. Of these, 38% had heard of biosimilars. The respondents worried about biosimilars' safety profile [47.0%], efficacy [40.3%], and molecular basis [35.0%]. Only 25.2% of the respondents had no concerns about biosimilars. Just over half [55.9%] of the respondents thought that the lower cost of the biosimilars should not come before their safety and efficacy. Only 12.5% of respondents felt that extrapolation made sense. The survey showed that 39.9% felt that patients should be systematically informed, and 26.7% felt that patient associations should be informed and able to give their opinions. It also revealed that 20.9% of the respondents would be against the idea of interchangeability if the patient was not aware 65.7% of the respondents would want to know whether they were receiving the reference drug or the biosimilar, and have all necessary information in writing before the drug was administered. Only 31.0% of the respondents would be fully confident about biosimilars, even if they were prescribed and explained by the treating physician. Conclusions: Most patients were not familiar with biosimilars, and those who were had doubts and concerns about the biosimilars' safety and efficacy. The patients wished to be informed and involved in decision-making concerning biosimilars.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Patient Perspectives on Biosimilars A Survey by the European Federation of Crohn's and Ulcerative Colitis Association.pdf

non disponibili

Tipologia: Versione Editoriale (PDF)
Licenza: Copyright dell'editore
Dimensione 189.95 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
189.95 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11699/1408
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 78
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 69
social impact