METHODS: We searched the official websites of the National Pharmaceutical Regulatory Agency (NPRA) Malaysia and three other well-established agencies, online databases of Medline® and EMBASE for guidelines on legislation and regulations of biosimilars. Meanwhile, we extracted the reports of AEs involving biosimilars in Malaysia from the NPRA database and for global AEs from the World Health Organisation VigyLize database. The ClinicalTrials.gov Website by the U.S. National Library of Medicines was the source for data on clinical trials.

RESULTS: Malaysia followed the principles of the European Medicines Agency biosimilar regulations and issued their guideline in 2008. Since then, NPRA has approved 24 biosimilar products and recorded 499 AE reports, of which 43 (8.6%) were serious. NPRA has also approved ten Phase III clinical trials in Malaysia with four trials still ongoing.

OBJECTIVES: Our study aimed to determine Malaysian hospital pharmacists' perspectives on biosimilars and to identify factors influencing the successful promotion of biosimilars to prescribers.

METHODS: This was a cross-sectional, web-based survey of hospital pharmacists across Malaysia. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with pharmacists successfully promoting biosimilar use.

RESULTS: Of the 913 responses, over 60% of pharmacists believed that patients may safely be switched from the originator product to a biosimilar and would have the same clinical outcome. Many lacked training in biosimilars (62.8%); yet most (80.6%) perceived pharmacists to play a critical role in promoting biosimilar prescribing. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the strongest factor associated with pharmacists' successful promotion of biosimilars to prescribers was having confidence (odds ratio [OR], 3.33; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.10-5.26). Respondents who had prior experience handling biosimilars were more likely to be successful in promoting biosimilar use than those without (OR, 1.76; 95% CI 1.16-2.66). The pharmacists' top perceived barrier to promote biosimilars in clinical practice was efficacy concerns.

OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to describe and assess the recommendations of published position statements regarding several aspects of biosimilars across specialties and determine whether these positions have changed with the emergence of new evidence.

METHODS: We systematically searched for published position statements of biosimilars in online databases and included statements written in English. The search was from the inception of the databases until May 2023. Two reviewers independently extracted the data. Only position statements that included recommendations to guide the use of biosimilars in clinical practice and were issued by health organisations and societies, including expert panels, were included. We synthesised recommendations on five aspects: prescribing practice, extrapolation of indication, interchangeability, treatment initiation with biosimilars in biologic-naïve patients, and pharmacovigilance.

RESULTS: The review included 25 papers involving eight specialties, 16 of which were from European countries, 1 from an international organisation representing 49 countries, and 6 from various countries. The papers were published between 2009 and 2020, with 19 published between 2015 and 2020. Of the five aspects of biosimilars assessed, nearly half (11 of 25) of the papers at the time they were published did not base their positions on a scientific or evidence-based approach. Only 4 of the 25 position papers were identified as revisions of their previous papers. With increasing experience in biosimilars and the emergence of new evidence, about 60% (16 of 25) of the papers contained outdated recommendations, particularly on two aspects. They were extrapolations of indications and interchangeability (including switching). The recommendations for most papers for three other aspects were still appropriate. These were prescribing biosimilars by their brand name and active ingredient, initiating treatment with biosimilars in biologic-naïve patients, and monitoring the long-term safety of biosimilars through pharmacovigilance. For four of the revised papers, their position evolved from opposing indication extrapolation for biosimilars to accepting it, while the position of two papers shifted from not recommending biosimilar switching to permitting the practice. Meanwhile, most papers were against automatic substitution by pharmacists because the evidence for this practice was still limited.

METHODS: The authors invited 48 CGTP companies to participate in the survey between October 2019 and June 2020, and 30 companies responded.

RESULTS: The majority of respondents were aware of the mandatory CGTP regulatory control and the availability of the guidelines. Many CGTPs were in the early development phase, and the most difficult registration barriers were dossier preparation and compliance with the pre-clinical and clinical requirements.