Currently Viewing:
American Diabetes Association (ADA) 2017
Currently Reading
Dr Alan Carter on Biosimilars in the Insulin Market
July 27, 2017
Robby Booth of Glytec Discusses the Importance of Data-Sharing Capabilities
July 24, 2017
Dr Andrew Rhinehart: Improving Intermediate Outcomes in Diabetes Research
July 20, 2017
WellDoc Data Offer Promise for Integrating Diabetes Data Into Workflow
July 17, 2017
Dr Alan Carter on the Steps to Managing Rising Insulin Costs
July 17, 2017
Dr Eda Cengiz Discusses the Future of Diabetes Management
July 13, 2017
Nina Brown-Ashford: DPP Will Improve Care and Costs for Prediabetes Patients
July 06, 2017
Dr Alan Carter on Increasing Insulin Costs
July 04, 2017
Dr William Polonsky on Diabetes Patients' Treatment Satisfaction and Insulin Adherence
June 29, 2017
Dr Eda Cengiz on Improvements in Closed-Loop Systems
June 26, 2017
With Glytec, Hospital Moves to Basal-Bolus Insulin, Saves $9.7 Million
June 21, 2017
Raymie McFarland Discusses Findings From Glytec's Basal-Bolus Insulin Study
June 21, 2017
Sanofi Presents New Results for Insulin GLP-1 Combo Soliqua
June 13, 2017
Dr Bruce Neal Discusses Canagliflozin's Potential for Heart Failure Prevention
June 13, 2017
Dr Eda Cengiz Explains Artificial Pancreas Systems' Implications for Patients and Clinicians
June 13, 2017
CGM "Debate" Finds Benefits, Barriers to Uptake for Type 2 Diabetes
June 12, 2017
CANVAS Finds Lower Risk of CV Events for Invokana
June 12, 2017
Phase 3 Results Show Lower A1C for Ertugliflozin, Combined With Metformin and With Sitagliptin
June 12, 2017
Heart Failure Needs More Attention in Diabetes Drug Trials, Expert Says
June 11, 2017

Dr Alan Carter on Biosimilars in the Insulin Market

Alan Carter, PharmD, principal investigator and senior advisor at MRIGlobal, and adjunct faculty at University of Missouri—Kansas City School of Pharmacy discusses the influence of biosimilars and follow-ons in the insulin market and their reliability should be validated.


Alan Carter, PharmD, principal investigator and senior advisor at MRIGlobal, and adjunct faculty at University of Missouri­–Kansas City School of Pharmacy discusses the influence of biosimilars and follow-ons in the insulin market and their reliability should be validated.

Transcript (slightly modified)

Will we see “biosimilar” or follow-on insulins impact the insulin market?

I think they will and I think they will have a relatively positive impact on price, but again, because the pharmacy benefit managers will be involved in negotiations and since they are follow-ons, they are not technically a generic. There is not an automatic substitution rule, but that could vary between state to state, since some states will allow substitution, if its interchangeable without notifying a physician or practitioner that wrote the prescription, by the pharmacy. That creates a mail-order issue, where it could show up on a patient’s door step with a letter inside it saying “your product has been substituted for this product, your physician has been notified. If you have any questions, call this number.” That’s all they are required to do.

But with a diabetes patient, and now that we have multiple branches of unit strengths, such as Toujeo 100 units versus 200 units, it’s much cheaper to use a 200 unit per 100 unit dose if they substitute that and the patient doesn’t understand that they have to give half their dose—there’re going to be dosing errors. We standardized 100 units per milliliter a long time ago because there were dosing errors based on 30, 50, 100 unit dose vials, and we had syringes specifically made for each strength. We had a lot of patients end up overdosing on insulin by getting the 100 units instead and that can very easily happen in this scenario.

You have to worry about the biosimilars and follow-ons too because we’ve seen in generic products that are made in other countries, the quality is sometimes excellent but the quality is sometimes not and the FDA never does an inspection on the quality directly of the drug itself. They don’t pull a sample from the pipeline and do analytical work on it ever after it is approved. The only reason they look into it is if a certain number of people die or get sick in a very short period of time, then they start digging into why.

I believe we should have an ongoing prospective review of drugs where we pull some out of the pharmaceutical supply line, either from the pharmacy directly or from the wholesaler, at random fashion and run an analytical review of that through a qualified laboratory and compare that to what is expected to be found. If it does not match we can go the manufacturer and say “what’s up with this? Is this lot potentially bad?” If they know you’re looking at them, they’ll be a little more careful, but since no one is looking, there is no reason to be careful. Ethical companies will be, but those that are not so much, will not be because they have to keep their doors open at the low price they are forced to sell it at. We’ve seen that happen in oversee manufacturers, where the price is too low and even at their lower labor rates they can’t keep it open, so they cheat. Eventually when you cheat, someone gets hurt and I don’t want my patients or myself to get hurt.

 
Copyright AJMC 2006-2017 Clinical Care Targeted Communications Group, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
x
Welcome the the new and improved AJMC.com, the premier managed market network. Tell us about yourself so that we can serve you better.
Sign Up
×

Sign In

Not a member? Sign up now!