You are here

  • Home
  • Archive
  • Volume 79, Issue 2
  • Response to: ‘Mandatory, cost-driven switching from originator etanercept to its biosimilar SB4: possible fallout on non-medical switching’ by Cantini and Benucci

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Correspondence response
Response to: ‘Mandatory, cost-driven switching from originator etanercept to its biosimilar SB4: possible fallout on non-medical switching’ by Cantini and Benucci
  1. Bente Glintborg1,2,
  2. Anne Gitte Loft3,4,
  3. Emina Omerovic5,
  4. Oliver Hendricks6,
  5. Asta Linauskas7,
  6. Jakob Espesen8,
  7. Kamilla Danebod2,
  8. Dorte Vendelbo Jensen2,
  9. Henrik Nordin9,
  10. Emil Barner Dalgaard10,
  11. Stavros Chrysidis11,
  12. Salome Kristensen12,
  13. Johnny Lillelund Raun13,
  14. Hanne Lindegaard14,
  15. Natalia Manilo15,
  16. Susanne Højmark Jakobsen16,
  17. Inger Marie Jensen Hansen16,
  18. Dorte Dalsgaard Pedersen16,
  19. Inge Juul Sørensen17,
  20. Lis Smedegaard Andersen18,
  21. Jolanta Grydehøj19,
  22. Frank Mehnert20,
  23. Niels Steen Krogh21,
  24. Merete Lund Hetland1,17
  1. 1 The DANBIO registry and Copenhagen Center for Arthritis Research (COPECARE), Center for Rheumatology and Spine Diseases, Centre of Head and Orthopaedics, Glostrup, Denmark
  2. 2 Department of Rheumatology, Gentofte and Herlev Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
  3. 3 Department of Rheumatology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
  4. 4 Department of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark
  5. 5 Department of Rheumatology, Center for Rheumatology and Spine Diseases, Centre of Head and Orthopaedics, Rigshospitalet, København, Denmark
  6. 6 Kong Christian X’s Gigthospital, Gråsten, Denmark
  7. 7 Department of Rheumatology, North Denmark Regional Hospital, Hjørring, Denmark
  8. 8 Department of Rheumatology, Vejle Hospital, Vejle, Denmark
  9. 9 Department of Rheumatology, Zealand University Hospital, Køge, Denmark
  10. 10 Department of Rheumatology, Silkeborg Hospital, Silkeborg, Denmark
  11. 11 Department of Rheumatology, Esbjerg Hospital, Esbjerg, Denmark
  12. 12 Department of Rheumatology, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark
  13. 13 Department of Rheumatology, Sygehus Lillebælt, Fredericia, Denmark
  14. 14 Department of Rheumatology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
  15. 15 Department of Rheumatology, Frederiksberg Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
  16. 16 Department of Rheumatology, OUH, Svendborg Hospital, Svendborg, Denmark
  17. 17 Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
  18. 18 Department of Internal Medicine, Rønne Hospital, Rønne, Denmark
  19. 19 Department of Rheumatology, Holstebro Hospital, Holstebro, Denmark
  20. 20 Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
  21. 21 Zitelab, Copenhagen, Denmark
  1. Correspondence to Dr Bente Glintborg, Department of Rheumatology, Gentofte and Herlev University Hospital, Hellerup 3500, Denmark; glintborg{at}dadlnet.dk

http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/annrheumdis-2018-214788

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Thank you for the interest in our publication based on data from the Danish DANBIO registry regarding 2061 patients who were eligible for a mandatory non-medical switch from originator to biosimilar etanercept in routine care.1 2 The marketing of biosimilars has changed the landscape of the biological drugs with the potential for huge cost reductions, most markedly if patients may be switched from an ongoing successful treatment with the expensive originator to a much cheaper biosimilar. Thus, up to 75% price reduction has been experienced in Denmark so far with no evidence of increased use of health resources.3 The outcomes of a non-medical switch of etanercept in the real-world setting are, however, largely unknown, since prevous publications on switching in routine care have included limited numbers of patients. The aim of the study was therefore to investigate the effectiveness of a large-scale, …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Handling editor Josef S Smolen

    • Contributors All authors contributed to and approved this letter to the editor.

    • Funding This article is funded by the Research to Prevent Blindness (New York, New York) (grant number 1602760177).

    • Competing interests BG: AbbVie, Biogen, Pfizer, MSD. MLH: Orion, BMS, AbbVie, Biogen, Pfizer, MSD, Celltrion. IMJH: Roche. AGL: AbbVie, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB. OH: AbbVie, Roche, Novartis. HN: AbbVie, Novartis, Medac. LSA: Pfizer.

    • Patient consent for publication Not required.

    • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

    Linked Articles