Health technology assessment of biosimilars worldwide: a scoping review

Imagem de Miniatura
Arquivos
art_ASCEF_Health_technology_assessment_of_biosimilars_worldwide_a_scoping_2020.PDF.pdf (856.7 KB)
Citações na Scopus
9
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2020
DOI
Scopus
Web of Science
PubMed
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
BMC
Autores
Citação
HEALTH RESEARCH POLICY AND SYSTEMS, v.18, n.1, article ID 95, 13p, 2020
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Fascículo
Resumo
Background Health technology assessment (HTA) should provide an assessment of a technology's effects on health and of the related social, economic, organisational and ethical issues. HTA reports on biosimilars can specifically assess their immunogenicity, their extrapolation to one or more conditions, and the risks of interchangeability and substitution. We aimed to complete a scoping review within the context of HTA organisations to synthesise HTA reports on biosimilars and to map the extension, scope and methodological practices. Main body A scoping review methodology was applied. The sources for biosimilars HTA reports were database searches and grey literature from HTA organisation websites up to June 2019. HTA reports of biosimilars were classified as full HTA, mini-HTA or rapid reviews. Data were extracted and recorded on a calibrated predefined data form. We identified 70 HTA reports of biosimilars of 16 biologic products (65.71% in 2015-2018) produced by 13 HTA organisations from 10 countries; 2 full HTAs, 4 mini-HTAs and 64 rapid reviews met the inclusion criteria. Almost all the rapid reviews gave no information regarding any evidence synthesis method and approximately half of the rapid reviews did not appraise the risk of bias of primary studies or the overall quality of evidence. All full-HTAs and mini-HTAs addressed organisational, ethical, social and legal considerations, while these factors were assessed in less than half of the rapid reviews. The immunogenicity and extrapolation of one or more conditions were often considered. The majority of full-HTAs and mini-HTAs contained an assessment of switching and a discussion of an educational approach about biosimilars. No HTA report rejected the adoption/reimbursement of the biosimilar assessed. Conclusion HTA of biosimilars are emerging in the context of HTA organisations and those that exist often duplicate reports of the same biosimilar. Most HTA reports of biosimilars do not conduct a systematic literature review or consider economic issues. No report has rejected the adoption/reimbursement of biosimilars. There is a need to standardise the minimum criteria for the development of HTA on biosimilars to ensure a better understanding and better decision-making.
Palavras-chave
Biosimilar pharmaceuticals, Technology assessment, Biomedical, Health policy, Evidence-based decisions
URI
https://observatorio.fm.usp.br/handle/OPI/37867
Referências
  1. Aladul MI, 2019, RES SOC ADMIN PHARM, V15, P310, DOI 10.1016/j.sapharm.2018.05.009
  2. Allocati E, 2020, EUR J CLIN PHARMACOL, V76, P557, DOI 10.1007/s00228-019-02805-y
  3. [Anonymous], 2019, SCI CONS DEM BIOS RE
  4. Arksey H, 2005, INT J SOC RES METHOD, V8, P1, DOI 10.1080/1364557032000119616
  5. Ascef BD, 2019, CAD SAUDE PUBLICA, V35, DOI 10.1590/0102-311X00087219
  6. Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health, 2018, BIOS REG HLTH TECHN
  7. Castaneda-Hernandez G, 2019, PHARMACOEPIDEM DR S, V28, P1035, DOI 10.1002/pds.4785
  8. Chamova J, 2017, MAPPING HTA NATL ORG
  9. de Mora F, 2020, HEALTH POLICY TECHN, V9, P137, DOI 10.1016/j.hlpt.2020.04.002
  10. Declerck P, 2017, DRUGS, V77, P671, DOI 10.1007/s40265-017-0717-1
  11. Novaes HMD, 2016, CAD SAUDE PUBLICA, V32, DOI 10.1590/0102-311X00022315
  12. Garrido MV, 2010, HEALTH POLICY, V94, P196, DOI 10.1016/j.healthpol.2009.10.002
  13. Gasteiger C, 2020, RHEUMATOL INT, DOI 10.1007/s00296-020-04576-7
  14. Goeree R, 2018, J MED ECON, V21, P163, DOI 10.1080/13696998.2017.1384737
  15. Gonzalez-Ramirez R, 2019, PHARM PAT ANAL, V8, P221, DOI 10.4155/ppa-2019-0026
  16. Gulacsi L, 2017, ADV THER, V34, P1128, DOI 10.1007/s12325-017-0522-y
  17. Hofmann B, 2015, INT J TECHNOL ASSESS, V31, P131, DOI 10.1017/S0266462315000276
  18. International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAH TA), 2018, GLOSS HTA
  19. Kent D, 2019, DISRUPTION MATURITY
  20. Kristensen FB, 2019, VALUE HEALTH, V22, P13, DOI 10.1016/j.jval.2018.08.010
  21. Lafortune L, 2008, INT J TECHNOL ASSESS, V24, P76, DOI 10.1017/S0266462307080105
  22. Leonard E, 2019, J MANAG CARE SPEC PH, V25, P102, DOI 10.18553/jmcp.2019.25.1.102
  23. Loblova O, 2016, HEALTH ECON POLICY L, V11, P253, DOI 10.1017/S1744133115000444
  24. McBride A, 2017, J MED ECON, V20, P1083, DOI 10.1080/13696998.2017.1358173
  25. Merlin T, 2014, INT J TECHNOL ASSESS, V30, P430, DOI 10.1017/S0266462314000543
  26. Mysler E, 2016, RHEUMATOL INT, V36, P613, DOI 10.1007/s00296-016-3444-0
  27. Neumann PJ, 2010, INT J TECHNOL ASSESS, V26, P71, DOI 10.1017/S0266462309990833
  28. O'Dowd R, 2019, LANG LEARN TECHNOL, V23, P1
  29. Peters MDJ, 2015, INT J EVID-BASED HEA, V13, P141, DOI 10.1097/XEB.0000000000000050
  30. Pfadenhauer LRA, 2020, GUIDANCE ASSESSMENT
  31. Ravasio R, 2018, GLOB REG HEALTH TECH, DOI 10.1177/2284240318766804
  32. Rencz F, 2017, EXPERT REV PHARM OUT, V17, P597, DOI 10.1080/14737167.2017.1322509
  33. Sandvei M, 2012, ROLE PLANNED ONGOING
  34. Sarnola K, 2020, BMJ OPEN, V10, DOI 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034183
  35. Severs M, 2017, J CROHNS COLITIS, V11, P289, DOI 10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjw153
  36. Sharma T, 2015, INT J TECHNOL ASSESS, V31, P138, DOI 10.1017/S0266462314000749
  37. Silva RB, 2019, INT J TECHNOL ASSESS, V35, P92, DOI [10.1017/S0266462319003271, DOI 10.1017/S0266462319003271]
  38. Simoens S, 2011, CLINICOECONOMIC OUTC, V3, P29, DOI 10.2147/CEOR.S12494
  39. Stephens JM, 2012, COMP EFF RES, V2, P29, DOI 10.2147/CER.S22984
  40. Tricco AC, 2018, ANN INTERN MED, V169, P467, DOI 10.7326/M18-0850
  41. Vakil N, 2019, CURR EMERG HOSP ME R, V7, P111, DOI 10.1007/s40138-019-00185-2
  42. Wang J, 2012, PHARMACEUTICALS, V5, P353, DOI 10.3390/ph5040353
  43. WHO Collaborating Centre for Drugs Statistics Methodology, ATC CLSS IND DDDS
  44. World Health Organization, 2009, GUID EV SIM BIOTH PR
  45. Zinzani PL, 2019, DRUGS, V79, P1609, DOI 10.1007/s40265-019-01193-y

Coleções
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - FM/MPR
Livros e Capítulos de Livros - LIM/38