ArticleJournal of managed care & specialty pharmacy2025
Real-world familiarity with US biosimilar regulatory guidelines and interchangeability state laws among pharmacists and physicians treating immunological disorders.
Article in Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Real-world switching and switch-back patterns among patients transitioning from adalimumab to biosimilars in the United States (February 2023 to August 2025).Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2026Article
- Assessing Nurses' Knowledge and Attitudes Towards Biosimilars: Results from a National Survey.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) considers an interchangeable biosimilar to produce the same clinical result as the reference product in any given patient. Interchangeability standards indicate that the biosimilar can be automatically substituted by pharmacists for the reference product without the intervention of the prescribing health care provider, where state law permits. More research is needed to describe pharmacists' and physicians' perceptions and experience with biosimilars in real-world settings for immunological disorders.
objectiveTo assess US providers' perceptions and decision-making around the prescribing and dispensing of biosimilars, including those with an interchangeability designation.
methodsUS outpatient pharmacists and physicians who prescribe biologics for dermatological, gastroenterological, rheumatological, or other immunological disorders responded to a cross-sectional electronic survey. Respondents reported data on professional characteristics, pharmacy characteristics, familiarity with regulatory guidelines, workflow relevant to treatment substitutions, and perceived barriers to navigating the interchangeability designation and dispensing interchangeable biosimilars. Data were aggregated and summarized descriptively.
resultsOne hundred fifty physicians and 99 pharmacists (total n = 249) from diverse practice settings responded to the survey. Continuing education units related to biosimilars were obtained by 65.7% of pharmacists and 50.7% of physicians. A higher percentage of pharmacists (35.4%) than physicians (20.0%) reported themselves as "extremely familiar" with pharmacy retention of communication records. A greater proportion of pharmacists (47.5%) than physicians (31.3%) were "extremely likely" to recommend a biosimilar product to new start patients (ie, never treated with a reference biologic and/or biosimilar). Among all providers, the barriers to biosimilars most often perceived to be "extremely significant" were payer coverage/formulary placement (51.0%) and cost to the patient (41.0%). The strategies that were reported as the highest likelihood of improving the uptake of interchangeable biosimilars (reported as either "likely" or -"extremely likely") were as follows: conducting studies and developing educational programs that assess outcomes of biosimilars and biosimilars with an interchangeability designation in clinical practice (82.3%), FDA guidance on biosimilars with an interchangeability designation for treatment-naive patients (81.9%), FDA guidance on biosimilars with an interchangeability designation for switching patients (81.6%), and educational programs on billing and reimbursement (79.1%).
conclusionsPharmacists reported higher rates of familiarity and training with biosimilars and recommendation of biosimilars to patients than physicians. A diverse sample of physicians and pharmacists expressed perceived barriers and strategies to improve biosimilars uptake, including educational programs and FDA guidance. Further research is needed to determine if providers' perceptions of biosimilars are associated with biosimilars uptake.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.