↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Biosimilar medicines and cost-effectiveness

Overview of attention for article published in ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR, February 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
2 policy sources

Citations

dimensions_citation
74 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
166 Mendeley
Title
Biosimilar medicines and cost-effectiveness
Published in
ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR, February 2011
DOI 10.2147/ceor.s12494
Pubmed ID
Authors

Steven Simoens

Abstract

Given that biosimilars are agents that are similar but not identical to the reference biopharmaceutical, this study aims to introduce and describe specific issues related to the economic evaluation of biosimilars by focusing on the relative costs, relative effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness of biosimilars. Economic evaluation assesses the cost-effectiveness of a medicine by comparing the costs and outcomes of a medicine with those of a relevant comparator. The assessment of cost-effectiveness of a biosimilar is complicated by the fact that evidence needed to obtain marketing authorization from a registration authority does not always correspond to the data requirements of a reimbursement authority. In particular, this relates to the availability of adequately powered equivalence or noninferiority studies, the need for comparative data about the effectiveness in a real-world setting rather than the efficacy in a structured setting, and the use of health outcome measures instead of surrogate endpoints. As a biosimilar is likely to be less expensive than the comparator (eg, the reference biopharmaceutical), the assessment of the cost-effectiveness of a biosimilar depends on the relative effectiveness. If appropriately designed and powered clinical studies demonstrate equivalent effectiveness between a biosimilar and the comparator, then a cost-minimization analysis identifies the least expensive medicine. If there are differences in the effectiveness of a biosimilar and the comparator, other techniques of economic evaluation need to be employed, such as cost-effectiveness analysis or cost-utility analysis. Given that there may be uncertainty surrounding the long-term safety (ie, risk of immunogenicity and rare adverse events) and effectiveness of a biosimilar, the cost-effectiveness of a biosimilar needs to be calculated at multiple time points throughout the life cycle of the product.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 166 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Ecuador 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Other 2 1%
Unknown 154 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 35 21%
Researcher 32 19%
Student > Bachelor 27 16%
Other 19 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 8%
Other 23 14%
Unknown 16 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 42 25%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 30 18%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 23 14%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 9 5%
Chemistry 9 5%
Other 33 20%
Unknown 20 12%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 November 2020.
All research outputs
#3,940,525
of 19,486,994 outputs
Outputs from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#83
of 445 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,589
of 139,233 outputs
Outputs of similar age from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#1
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,486,994 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 445 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 139,233 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them