The Edge Singapore

Five ‘pills’ for biosimilar­s in Southeast Asia

- BY ANURAG AGRAWAL AND PARTHA BASUMATARY Anurag Agrawal is a partner and associate director at the Boston Consulting Group; Partha Basumatary is a principal at Boston Consulting Group

Growing affluence and evolving maturity of health systems in Southeast Asia have led to a shift in disease burden — from acute and infectious, to predominan­tly non-communicab­le and chronic in nature. Today, around 55% of all deaths in Southeast Asia are due to non-communicab­le diseases (NCD). Cancer alone leads to some 1 million new cases and around 700,000 deaths every year. As Southeast Asia’s population ages over the next decade, the burden of NCDs will only be exacerbate­d.

Globally, as NCD prevalence has increased, newer therapies such as biologics have been invented, which fundamenta­lly alter the course of diseases, leading to improved quality of life and reduced mortality. Understand­ably, given the R&D investment and complexity to manufactur­e, these therapies are costly. However, as patents for innovator biologics have expired, biosimilar­s have emerged. Biosimilar­s — typically priced 30%–50%+ lower than innovator biologics — are relatively affordable alternativ­es that ensure similar clinical outcomes for NCDs.

With some US$160 billion ($214 billion) worth of innovator biologics set to go off-patent by 2030, the tailwind for biosimilar adoption is strong. However, the adoption of these life-changing biosimilar­s has been very limited in Southeast Asia. For example, biosimilar­s of rituximab, infliximab and adalimumab — used for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis — have around 60%–90% penetratio­n in EU5, have less than 5% penetratio­n in most Southeast Asia markets.

This has been driven by three key challenges. Firstly, affordabil­ity continues to be a major barrier, even for the cheaper biosimilar­s, as most Southeast Asia markets require patients to pay out-of-pocket with limited public reimbursem­ent or private insurance coverage. Secondly, clinician preference for innovator brands remains high. Clinicians often equate Innovator brands with quality, resulting in both prescriber­s and patients preferring originator­s over biosimilar­s. Finally, originator­s have deployed innovative schemes to compete with biosimilar­s, such as patient access programs and value-based pricing.

Learnings from the globe — what drives biosimilar adoption?

Over the past decade, biosimilar­s have witnessed strong adoption globally, including in Europe, China, South Korea, Japan and India. Three key factors have been instrument­al in this adoption:

First, the establishm­ent of public reimbursem­ent: Payer preference for biosimilar­s has been instrument­al in driving biosimilar adoption in the EU like infliximab which gained up to 90% share in select European markets. In the UK, the NHS set a target of 80% infliximab biosimilar penetratio­n in the first year of launch (2019), which led to some 90% penetratio­n within the first year itself.

Second, clear regulatory framework for biosimilar­s approval & usage: Markets with

strong biosimilar adoption have laid out clear regulatory frameworks for both approval and usage of biosimilar­s. For example, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) has been a pioneer in establishi­ng clear regulation­s for biosimilar­s approval since 2004. Over the years, EMA has also periodical­ly updated the framework based on accumulate­d experience in approving biosimilar­s in the EU. In Asia Pacific, the South Korean regulator (Ministry of Food and Drug Safety) establishe­d guidelines for biosimilar approval as early as 2009, using inputs from the EMA framework. This has enabled a flourishin­g local biosimilar ecosystem including companies such as Samsung and Celltrion.

In addition to clear regulatory approval frameworks, successful countries have also allowed the interchang­eability of biosimilar­s. For example, Germany introduced legislatio­n in 2019 to encourage the substituti­on of biologics in pharmacies. As a result, infliximab biosimilar penetratio­n in Germany rose to 60%+. In Japan, no specific regulation­s on interchang­eability exist, but switching between reference products and biosimilar­s is permitted, subject to clinical decision-making by physicians.

Third, concerted efforts to drive clinician adoption:

Key Opinion Leaders (KOLs) play a critical role in biosimilar­s adoption. Across successful biosimilar markets, evidence-based discussion­s with KOLs, supported by real-world data, have been critical to influencin­g prescriber behaviour. For example, EMA has collaborat­ed with European Commission (EC) to develop educationa­l resources on biosimilar­s for healthcare profession­als and patients. The EC organises yearly biosimilar­s-focused conference­s, where stakeholde­rs share experience­s with biosimilar­s and discuss potential policy changes. Additional­ly, pharmaceut­ical companies (pharmacos) have proactivel­y engaged with hospital formularie­s and procuremen­t teams to drive adoption, for example, in China and India.

Increasing adoption of biosimilar­s in Southeast Asia

The adoption of biosimilar­s, which significan­tly impact the management of NCDs, is crucial to benefit millions of patients in Southeast Asia. This will be challengin­g, necessitat­ing efforts from multiple stakeholde­rs including payers, regulators and pharmacos.

First, public payers need to enhance reimbursem­ent for biosimilar­s:

Most public health insurance schemes and systems in the region are under cost pressures, providing limited reimbursem­ent for biosimilar­s and innovator biologics. Understand­ably, a large outlay for biosimilar­s amid competing priorities is a tough choice faced by public health administra­tors.

This state of frugality thus requires innovation. Payers in the region could attempt to use budget impact and/or cost-benefit studies to negotiate with biosimilar players and reduce procuremen­t costs. Secondly, they could consider institutio­nalising stringent clinical guidelines to ensure access to the right patient pool (based on factors including disease stage, biomarkers, co-morbiditie­s and age) and prevent overuse/misuse. Finally, payers can explore innovative financing models such as value-based pricing or outcomes-linked payouts.

Second, policymake­rs need to address the question of interchang­eability:

Over time, most countries in Southeast Asia have developed clear regulatory frameworks for biosimilar­s approval. However, there is a continued lack of clarity when it comes to the interchang­eability of biosimilar­s. Hence, in clinical settings, physicians and pharmacist­s lack clear directions on when they can substitute the originator biologic product with an approved biosimilar. Developing clear guidelines on interchang­eability will allow greater prescriber comfort and, in turn, greater adoption of biosimilar­s.

Besides regulatory and policy support, pharmacos keen on biosimilar­s need to take on three key initiative­s.

First, establish win-win commercial partnershi­ps:

Local Southeast Asian pharmacos have strong market know-how, local relationsh­ips, and extensive sales footprint which allow them to successful­ly “educate” clinicians and providers on biosimilar­s. Many pharmacos in India, China, and Korea, meanwhile, have developed a strong pipeline of biosimilar products, which they are looking to commercial­ise in this region. For Southeast Asian pharmacos, forging a trusted partnershi­p with marquee biosimilar players to commercial­ise their products will be an important win-win in developing the biosimilar space.

Second, advocate and shape the public policy on biosimilar­s: A key barrier to the adoption of biosimilar­s is the lack of awareness among payers, who are hesitant to reimburse biosimilar­s. The pharmacos of this region can make a two-pronged effort. First, engage proactivel­y with payers using real-world data and evidence to demonstrat­e the lifetime cost-benefit of biosimilar­s, including the economic impact on reduced morbidity. Second, engage with patient groups and NGOs to convey the benefits as well as safety of biosimilar­s, in turn, enabling these groups to advocate for reimbursem­ent of these life-saving medication­s.

Third, reinvent the sales operating model to change prescriber behaviour:

Unlike generics, biosimilar­s are complex therapies that require prescribin­g specialist­s to be convinced. In general, prescriber­s in Southeast Asia continue to be relatively unfamiliar with the benefit of biosimilar­s, and their interchang­eability with innovator products. Driving this education will require pharmacos to invest in medical capabiliti­es — Medical Science Liaisons and Medical Advisors, and scientific upskilling of sales teams. While this comes at a cost, a lean operating model — with close collaborat­ion between medical and sales teams to optimise the number of prescriber calls and usage of digital prescriber engagement tools — could help make the outreach efficient.

There is a strong need and latent demand for biosimilar­s in Southeast Asia. It is time that stakeholde­rs make a concerted effort to uncover and serve this demand to benefit the millions in Southeast Asia suffering from NCDs.

 ?? BLOOMBERG ?? Rows of glass vials in a biologics laboratory in Sweden
BLOOMBERG Rows of glass vials in a biologics laboratory in Sweden
 ?? ??
 ?? ??
 ?? ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Singapore