Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Patients’ beliefs and behaviours are associated with perceptions of safety and concerns in a hypothetical biosimilar switch

  • Patient Opinion
  • Published:
Rheumatology International Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Although patient acceptance is important for biosimilar adoption and reducing healthcare costs, many patients perceive biosimilars to be unsafe and have concerns about switching. Studies show that patients’ characteristics influence negative perceptions toward generic drugs, but little research has explored biosimilar acceptance. This study examines which demographic and psychological characteristics are associated with patients’ safety perceptions and concerns about switching to biosimilars. Ninety-six patients taking bio-originators for rheumatic conditions (65% for rheumatoid arthritis) completed the Brief Illness Perceptions Questionnaire, Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire and Perceived Sensitivity to Medicines Scale. Demographic factors, information seeking, concerns about switching and safety perceptions were also assessed. Pearson’s correlations and hierarchical linear regressions were conducted to explore whether patient characteristics are associated with perceptions of biosimilars. Negative safety perceptions were associated with being female, short-term bio-originator use, illness beliefs, seeking health information online, high perceived sensitivity to medicines and negative beliefs about medicines. Only being female (β = 0.24, P = 0.02) was independently associated. More concerns about switching were associated with being female, illness beliefs, high perceived sensitivity to medicines, information-seeking behaviours and preferring innovator drugs. Seeking health information online (β = 0.20, P = 0.04), preferring innovator drugs (β = 0.29, P = 0.004) and stronger emotional responses (β = 0.26, P = 0.01) were independently associated. Perceived bio-originator effectiveness was inversely associated with preferring biosimilars (rs=  – 0.33, P < 0.001). Patients who have stronger emotional responses to their condition, are females, seek health information online and prefer innovator drugs that have more negative perceptions about biosimilars. Experiences with bio-originators influence attitudes towards switching.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Eleryan MG, Akhiyat S, Rengifo-Pardo M, Ehrlich A (2016) Biosimilars: Potential implications for clinicians. Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol 9:135–142. https://doi.org/10.2147/CCID.S91691

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Escasany AA, Cumplido DR (2015) Biosimilars: Current reality, promising future? Medicina Clínica (English Edition) 145:18–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medcli.2015.03.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Patel D, Park KT (2017) Path of interchangeability of biosimilars in pediatric inflammatory bowel disease: Quality before cost savings. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 65:134–136. https://doi.org/10.1097/MPG.0000000000001572

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Sullivan E, Piercy J, Waller J, Black CM, Kachroo S (2017) Assessing gastroenterologist and patient acceptance of biosimilars in ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease across Germany. PLoS One 12:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0175826

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Wilkins AR, Venkat MV, Brown AS, Dong JP, Ran NA, Hirsch JS, Close KL (2014) Patient perspectives on biosimilar insulin. J Diabetes Sci Technol 8:23–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932296813515132

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Attara G, Bressler B, Bailey R, Marshall JK, Panaccione R, Aumais G (2016) Canadian patient and caregiver perspectives on subsequent entry biologics/biosimilars for inflammatory bowel disease. Gastroenterology 150:443–444. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0016-5085(16)31540-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Ighani A, Wang JY, Manolson MF (2018) An evaluation of psoriasis patient perceptions and understanding of biosimilars: A Canadian survey comparing biologic and nonbiologic users. J Cutan Med Surg 22:365–367. https://doi.org/10.1177/1203475417746337

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Rezk MF, Pieper B (2017) Treatment outcomes with biosimilars: Be aware of the nocebo effect. Rheumatol Ther 4:209–218. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40744-017-0085-z

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Betegnie A, Gauchet A, Lehmann A, Grange L, Roustit M, Baudrant M, Bedouch P, Allenet B (2016) An assessment of patients’ adherence using a self-report questionnaire. J Rheumatol 43:724–730. https://doi.org/10.3899/jrheum.150414

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Figueiras MJ, Alves NC, Marcelino D, Cortes MA, Weinman J, Horne R (2009) Assessing lay beliefs about generic medicines: Development of the generic medicines scale. Psychol Health Med 14(3):311–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/13548500802613043

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. MacKrill K, Petrie KJ (2018) What is associated with increased side effects and lower perceived efficacy following switching to a generic medicine? A New Zealand cross-sectional patient survey. BMJ Open 8(10):e023667. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-023667

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Kleinstäuber M, MacKrill K, Petrie KJ (2018) Characteristics of individuals who prefer branded innovator over generic medicines: a New Zealand general population survey. Drugs Therapy Perspect 34(10):478–483. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40267-018-0541-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Babar ZU, Kan SW, Scahill S (2014) Interventions promoting the acceptance and uptake of generic medicines: A narrative review of the literature. Health Policy 117:285–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2014.06.004

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Olsson E, Svensberg K, Wallach-Kildemoes H, Carlsson E, Hällkvist C, Kaae S, Kälvemark Sporrong S (2018) Swedish patients’ trust in the bioequivalence of interchangeable generics. What factors are important for low trust? Pharm Pract. https://doi.org/10.18549/PharmPract.2018.04.1298

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Alrasheedy AA, Hassali AM, Stewart K, Kong DCM, Aljadhey H, Ibrahim MIM, Al-Tamimi SK (2014) Patient knowledge, perceptions, and acceptance of generic medicines: A comprehensive review of the current literature. Patient Intell 4:1–29. https://doi.org/10.2147/PI.S46737

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Faasse K, Grey A, Horne R, Petrie KJ (2015) High perceived sensitivity to medicines is associated with higher medical care utilisation, increased symptom reporting and greater information-seeking about medication. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 24:592–599. https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.3751

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Pechlivanoglou P, van der Veen WJ, Bos JH, Postma MJ (2011) Analyzing generic and branded substitution patterns in the Netherlands using prescription data. BMC Health Serv Res 11:89. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-11-89

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Gasteiger C, Jones ASK, Kleinstäuber M, Lobo M, Horne R, Dalbeth N, Petrie KJ (2019) The effects of message framing on patients’ perceptions and willingness to change to a biosimilar in a hypothetical drug switch. Arthr Care Res. https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.24012(Epub ahead of print)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Broadbent E, Petrie KJ, Main J, Weinman J (2006) The brief illness perception questionnaire. J Psychom Res 60:631–637. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychores.2005.10.020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Broadbent E, Wilkes C, Koschwanez H, Weinman J, Norton S, Petrie KJ (2015) A systematic review and meta-analysis of the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire. Psychol Health 30(11):1361–1385. https://doi.org/10.1080/08870446.2015.1070851

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Horne R, Weinman J, Hankins M (1999) The beliefs about medicines questionnaire: The development and evaluation of a new method for assessing the cognitive representation of medication. Psychol Health 14:1–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/08870449908407311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Heller MK, Chapman SC, Horne R (2015) Beliefs about medication predict the misattribution of a common symptom as a medication side effect - evidence from an analogue online study. J Psychosom Res 79:519–529. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychores.2015.10.003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Bautista RE, Gonzales W, Jain D (2011) Factors associated with poor seizure control and increased side effects after switching to generic antiepileptic drugs. Epilepsy Res 95:158–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eplepsyres.2011.03.014

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Horne R, Faasse K, Cooper V, Diefenbach MA, Leventhal H, Leventhal E, Petrie KJ (2013) The perceived sensitivity to medicines (PSM) scale: An evaluation of validity and reliability. Br J Health Psychol 18:18–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8287.2012.02071.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Nolke L, Mensing M, Kramer A, Hornberg C (2015) Sociodemographic and health-(care-)related characteristics of online health information seekers: a cross-sectional German study. BMC Public Health 15:31. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-015-1423-0

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Dunne S, Shannon B, Dunne C, Cullen W (2014) Patient perceptions of generic medicines: A mixed-methods study. Patient 7:177–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-013-0042-z

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Shaw Y, Metes ID, Michaud K, Donohue JM, Roberts MS, Levesque MC, Chang JC (2018) Rheumatoid arthritis patients’ motivations for accepting or resisting disease-modifying antirheumatic drug treatment regimens. Arthritis Care Res 70(4):533–541. https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.23301

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Graham-Engeland JE, Song S, Mathur A, Wagstaff DA, Klein LC, Whetzel C, Ayoub WT (2019) Emotional state can affect inflammatory responses to pain among rheumatoid arthritis patients: preliminary findings. Psychol Rep 122(6):2026–2049. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033294118796655

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Dures E, Fraser I, Almeida C, Peterson A, Caesley J, Pollock J, Ambler N, Morris M, Hewlett S (2017) Patients' perspectives on the psychological impact of inflammatory arthritis and meeting the associated support needs: open-ended responses in a multi-centre survey. Musculoskeletal Care 15(3):175–185. https://doi.org/10.1002/msc.1159

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. McMullan RD, Berle D, Arnáez S, Starcevic V (2019) The relationships between health anxiety, online health information seeking, and cyberchondria: Systematic review and meta-analysis. J Affective Disord 245:270–278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2018.11.037

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Gasteiger N, Grainger RKD (2018) Arthritis-Related Support in a Social Media Group for Quilting Hobbyists: Qualitative Study. Interact J Med Res 7(2):e11026. https://doi.org/10.2196/11026

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Teeple A, Ginsburg S, Howard L, Huff L, Reynolds C, Walls D, Ellis LA, Curtis JR (2019) Patient attitudes about non-medical switching to biosimilars: results from an online patient survey in the United States. Curr Med Res Opin 35(4):603–609. https://doi.org/10.1080/03007995.2018.1560221

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Edwards CJ, Hercogova J, Albrand H, Amiot A (2019) Switching to biosimilars: current perspectives in immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. Expert Opin Biol Ther 19(10):1001–1014. https://doi.org/10.1080/14712598.2019.1610381

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Rathe J, Larsen P, Andersen M, Paulsen M, Jarbol D, Thomsen J, Soendergaard J (2013) Associations between generic substitution and patients' attitudes, beliefs and experiences. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 69(10):1827–1836. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00228-013-1539-z

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Dunne S (2016) What do users of generic medicines think of them? A systematic review of consumers' and patients' perceptions of, and experiences with, generic medicines. Patient 9:499–510. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-016-0176-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Dunne S, Shannon B, Hannigan A, Dunne C, Cullen W (2014) Physician and pharmacist perceptions of generic medicines: What they think and how they differ. Health Policy 116:214–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2014.03.007

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Haghnejad V, Le Berre C, Dominique Y, Zallot C, Guillemin F, Peyrin-Biroulet L (2019) Impact of a medical interview on the decision to switch from originator infliximab to its biosimilar in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Dig Liver Dis. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dld.2019.09.012

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Jacobs I, Singh E, Sewell KL, Al-Sabbagh A, Shane LG (2016) Patient attitudes and understanding about biosimilars: An international cross-sectional survey. Patient Prefer Adher 10:937–948. https://doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S104891

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. van Overbeeke E, De Beleyr B, de Hoon J, Westhovens R, Huys I (2017) Perception of originator biologics and biosimilars: A survey among Belgian rheumatoid arthritis patients and rheumatologists. BioDrugs 31:447–459. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40259-017-0244-3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was not financially supported by any funding agency or grant.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychological Medicine, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, 1142, New Zealand

    Chiara Gasteiger & Keith J. Petrie

  2. Department of Rheumatology, Auckland District Health Board, Auckland, New Zealand

    Maria Lobo & Nicola Dalbeth

  3. Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand

    Nicola Dalbeth

Authors
  1. Chiara Gasteiger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maria Lobo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nicola Dalbeth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Keith J. Petrie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

CG, KP and ND contributed to the study conception and design, and material preparation. CG, ND and ML contributed to data collection. CG analysed the data. The first draft of the manuscript was written by CG, KP and ND. All authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript and read and approved the final manuscript. All co-authors of the study take full responsibility for the integrity of the final version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chiara Gasteiger.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interests

Nicola Dalbeth has received speaker fees, consulting fees, or grants from Janssen and Abbvie, AstraZeneca, and Amgen. The other authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Consent to participate

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gasteiger, C., Lobo, M., Dalbeth, N. et al. Patients’ beliefs and behaviours are associated with perceptions of safety and concerns in a hypothetical biosimilar switch. Rheumatol Int 41, 163–171 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00296-020-04576-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00296-020-04576-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation