从行动者网络理论的角度看影响生物仿制药吸收的障碍和促进因素:系统回顾。

IF 5.4 2区 医学 Q1 IMMUNOLOGY BioDrugs Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-15 DOI:10.1007/s40259-024-00659-0
Chad Rieger, Judith A Dean, Lisa Hall, Paola Vasquez, Gregory Merlo
{"title":"从行动者网络理论的角度看影响生物仿制药吸收的障碍和促进因素:系统回顾。","authors":"Chad Rieger, Judith A Dean, Lisa Hall, Paola Vasquez, Gregory Merlo","doi":"10.1007/s40259-024-00659-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>Biosimilars represent an opportunity to realise savings against the costs of innovative medicines. Despite efforts made by stakeholders, there are numerous barriers to the uptake of biosimilars. To realise the promise of biosimilars reducing costs, barriers must be identified, understood, and overcome, and enablers magnified. The aim of this systematic review is to summarise the enablers and barriers affecting uptake of biosimilars through the application of a classification system to organise them into healthcare professional (HCP), patient, or systemic categories.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, eConlit, and Embase. Included were primary research studies published in English between Jan 2017 through June 2023 focused on enablers and barriers affecting uptake of biosimilars. Excluded studies comprised comparisons of biosimilar efficacy and safety versus the reference biologic. One reviewer extracted data that included classification of barriers or enablers, the sub-classification, and the identification of the degree of agency associated with the actor through their role and associations as a mediator within their network, through the application of Actor Network Theory. The data were validated by a second reviewer (PV).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 94 studies included, 59 were cross-sectional, 20 were qualitative research, 12 were cohort studies, and three were economic evaluations. Within the review, 51 of the studies included HCP populations and 35 included patients. Policies and guidelines were the most cited group of enablers, overall. Systemic enablers were addressed in 29 studies. For patients, the most frequently cited enabler was positive framing of a biosimilar, while for HCPs, cost benefit was the most frequently noted enabler. The most frequently discussed systemic barrier to biosimilar acceptance was lack of effective policies or guidelines, followed by lack of financial incentives, while the most significant barriers for HCPs and patients, respectively, were their lack of general knowledge about biosimilars and concerns about safety and efficacy. Systemic actors and HCPs most frequently acted with broad degree of agency as mediators, while patient most frequently acted with a narrow degree of agency as mediators within their networks.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Barriers and enablers affecting uptake of biosimilars are interconnected within networks, and can be divided into systemic, HCP, and patient categories. Understanding the agency of actors within networks may allow for more comprehensive and effective approaches. Systemic enablers in the form of policies appear to be the most effective overall levers in affecting uptake of biosimilars, with policy makers advised to give careful consideration to appropriately educating HCPs and positively framing biosimilars for patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":9022,"journal":{"name":"BioDrugs","volume":" ","pages":"541-555"},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11247062/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Barriers and Enablers Affecting the Uptake of Biosimilar Medicines Viewed Through the Lens of Actor Network Theory: A Systematic Review.\",\"authors\":\"Chad Rieger, Judith A Dean, Lisa Hall, Paola Vasquez, Gregory Merlo\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40259-024-00659-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>Biosimilars represent an opportunity to realise savings against the costs of innovative medicines. Despite efforts made by stakeholders, there are numerous barriers to the uptake of biosimilars. To realise the promise of biosimilars reducing costs, barriers must be identified, understood, and overcome, and enablers magnified. The aim of this systematic review is to summarise the enablers and barriers affecting uptake of biosimilars through the application of a classification system to organise them into healthcare professional (HCP), patient, or systemic categories.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, eConlit, and Embase. Included were primary research studies published in English between Jan 2017 through June 2023 focused on enablers and barriers affecting uptake of biosimilars. Excluded studies comprised comparisons of biosimilar efficacy and safety versus the reference biologic. One reviewer extracted data that included classification of barriers or enablers, the sub-classification, and the identification of the degree of agency associated with the actor through their role and associations as a mediator within their network, through the application of Actor Network Theory. The data were validated by a second reviewer (PV).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 94 studies included, 59 were cross-sectional, 20 were qualitative research, 12 were cohort studies, and three were economic evaluations. Within the review, 51 of the studies included HCP populations and 35 included patients. Policies and guidelines were the most cited group of enablers, overall. Systemic enablers were addressed in 29 studies. For patients, the most frequently cited enabler was positive framing of a biosimilar, while for HCPs, cost benefit was the most frequently noted enabler. The most frequently discussed systemic barrier to biosimilar acceptance was lack of effective policies or guidelines, followed by lack of financial incentives, while the most significant barriers for HCPs and patients, respectively, were their lack of general knowledge about biosimilars and concerns about safety and efficacy. Systemic actors and HCPs most frequently acted with broad degree of agency as mediators, while patient most frequently acted with a narrow degree of agency as mediators within their networks.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Barriers and enablers affecting uptake of biosimilars are interconnected within networks, and can be divided into systemic, HCP, and patient categories. Understanding the agency of actors within networks may allow for more comprehensive and effective approaches. Systemic enablers in the form of policies appear to be the most effective overall levers in affecting uptake of biosimilars, with policy makers advised to give careful consideration to appropriately educating HCPs and positively framing biosimilars for patients.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9022,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BioDrugs\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"541-555\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11247062/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BioDrugs\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40259-024-00659-0\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/15 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"IMMUNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BioDrugs","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40259-024-00659-0","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目标:生物仿制药是节省创新药物成本的一个机会。尽管利益相关方做出了努力,但生物仿制药的应用仍面临诸多障碍。要实现生物仿制药降低成本的承诺,就必须识别、了解和克服障碍,并扩大有利因素。本系统综述旨在通过应用分类系统,将影响生物仿制药吸收的有利因素和障碍分为医疗保健专业人员(HCP)、患者或系统类别,从而对其进行总结:在 PubMed、Scopus、CINAHL、eConlit 和 Embase 中进行了系统的文献检索。纳入的研究为 2017 年 1 月至 2023 年 6 月间发表的英文初级研究,重点关注影响生物仿制药吸收的促进因素和障碍。排除的研究包括生物仿制药与参比生物制剂的疗效和安全性比较。一位审稿人提取的数据包括障碍或促进因素的分类、子分类,以及通过应用 "行为者网络理论"(Actor Network Theory),通过行为者在其网络中作为调解人的角色和关联,确定与行为者相关的代理程度。第二位审稿人(PV)对数据进行了验证:在纳入的 94 项研究中,59 项为横断面研究,20 项为定性研究,12 项为队列研究,3 项为经济评估。在综述中,有 51 项研究涉及到 HCP 群体,35 项研究涉及到患者。总体而言,政策和指南是被引用最多的一组促进因素。29 项研究探讨了系统性促进因素。对于患者而言,最常提到的促进因素是对生物仿制药的积极评价,而对于高级保健人员而言,最常提到的促进因素是成本效益。最常被讨论的阻碍生物仿制药被接受的系统性障碍是缺乏有效的政策或指导方针,其次是缺乏经济激励,而对于保健专业人员和患者来说,最主要的障碍分别是缺乏有关生物仿制药的一般知识以及对安全性和有效性的担忧。系统参与者和高级保健医生最经常作为调解人采取广泛的代理行动,而患者最经常作为其网络内的调解人采取狭隘的代理行动:影响生物仿制药吸收的障碍和促进因素在网络中相互关联,可分为系统、保健中心和患者三类。了解网络中各行为者的作用,可以采取更全面、更有效的方法。以政策为形式的系统性推动因素似乎是影响生物仿制药吸收的最有效的总体杠杆,建议政策制定者认真考虑对高级保健人员进行适当的教育,并为患者积极构建生物仿制药的框架。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Barriers and Enablers Affecting the Uptake of Biosimilar Medicines Viewed Through the Lens of Actor Network Theory: A Systematic Review.

Background and objective: Biosimilars represent an opportunity to realise savings against the costs of innovative medicines. Despite efforts made by stakeholders, there are numerous barriers to the uptake of biosimilars. To realise the promise of biosimilars reducing costs, barriers must be identified, understood, and overcome, and enablers magnified. The aim of this systematic review is to summarise the enablers and barriers affecting uptake of biosimilars through the application of a classification system to organise them into healthcare professional (HCP), patient, or systemic categories.

Methods: A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, eConlit, and Embase. Included were primary research studies published in English between Jan 2017 through June 2023 focused on enablers and barriers affecting uptake of biosimilars. Excluded studies comprised comparisons of biosimilar efficacy and safety versus the reference biologic. One reviewer extracted data that included classification of barriers or enablers, the sub-classification, and the identification of the degree of agency associated with the actor through their role and associations as a mediator within their network, through the application of Actor Network Theory. The data were validated by a second reviewer (PV).

Results: Of the 94 studies included, 59 were cross-sectional, 20 were qualitative research, 12 were cohort studies, and three were economic evaluations. Within the review, 51 of the studies included HCP populations and 35 included patients. Policies and guidelines were the most cited group of enablers, overall. Systemic enablers were addressed in 29 studies. For patients, the most frequently cited enabler was positive framing of a biosimilar, while for HCPs, cost benefit was the most frequently noted enabler. The most frequently discussed systemic barrier to biosimilar acceptance was lack of effective policies or guidelines, followed by lack of financial incentives, while the most significant barriers for HCPs and patients, respectively, were their lack of general knowledge about biosimilars and concerns about safety and efficacy. Systemic actors and HCPs most frequently acted with broad degree of agency as mediators, while patient most frequently acted with a narrow degree of agency as mediators within their networks.

Conclusions: Barriers and enablers affecting uptake of biosimilars are interconnected within networks, and can be divided into systemic, HCP, and patient categories. Understanding the agency of actors within networks may allow for more comprehensive and effective approaches. Systemic enablers in the form of policies appear to be the most effective overall levers in affecting uptake of biosimilars, with policy makers advised to give careful consideration to appropriately educating HCPs and positively framing biosimilars for patients.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BioDrugs
BioDrugs 医学-免疫学
CiteScore
12.60
自引率
2.90%
发文量
50
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: An essential resource for R&D professionals and clinicians with an interest in biologic therapies. BioDrugs covers the development and therapeutic application of biotechnology-based pharmaceuticals and diagnostic products for the treatment of human disease. BioDrugs offers a range of additional enhanced features designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. Each article is accompanied by a Key Points summary, giving a time-efficient overview of the content to a wide readership. Articles may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist patients, caregivers and others in understanding important medical advances. The journal also provides the option to include various other types of enhanced features including slide sets, videos and animations. All enhanced features are peer reviewed to the same high standard as the article itself. Peer review is conducted using Editorial Manager®, supported by a database of international experts. This database is shared with other Adis journals.
期刊最新文献
Effect of Biological Therapy for Psoriasis on the Development of Psoriatic Arthritis: A Population-Based Cohort Study. Biochemical Amenability in Fabry Patients Under Chaperone Therapy-How and When to Test? Introducing the Biosimilar Paradigm to Neurology: The Totality of Evidence for the First Biosimilar Natalizumab. Patient Satisfaction and Experience with CT-P17 Following Transition from Reference Adalimumab or Another Adalimumab Biosimilar: Results from the Real-World YU-MATTER Study. Pharmacokinetics, Safety, and Immunogenicity of a Biosimilar of Nivolumab (LY01015): A Randomized, Double-Blind, Parallel-Controlled Phase I Clinical Trial in Healthy Chinese Male Subjects.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1