Time to give up on biosimilars in the United States?

An article was recently published in the Wall Street Journal by a visiting scientist at MIT’s Sloan School of Management, Mark Trusheim, and a physician and director of Drug Pricing Lab at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Peter Bach. Bach and Trusheim wondered whether it was about time we gave up on biosimilars, since it wasn’t possible to completely duplicate them. The fact that they cannot be duplicated perfectly leads to cancer medication such as Herceptin, which was initially permitted for use in the United States in 1998, may command greater prices. The writer have stated how it should be tolerable to allow a couple of biologics to maintain their increased cost and go unopposed by biosimilar in the United States. They added how the people in the U.S. are spending only about $50 billion more each year due to the fact that the generic exclusivity period is functioning incorrectly on the biological sector of the industry. The authors argued how the broad testing process the biosimilars require for approval is troublesome and also slows down the innovation speed since these testing processes are stealing resources which could be used in clinical trials for various other potential treatments. What a joke.

In the biopharmaceutical sector, we value the requirement for an exclusivity period, which, after it has expired, allows generic competitors to generate their own low-cost duplicates. The authors have stated how the copy-developing process is comparatively simpler, they consequently state how this is the reason generic competition is only applicable to the small-molecule sector of the business. However, since biologics cannot be completely duplicated and the trial for the drug is troublesome and utilizes precious resources, maybe it’s not the best idea to spend ones time and money toward biosimilars.

, , , , ,