Literature review finds gaps between self-assessed and actual knowledge of biosimilars in medical specialists, suggesting targeted training is required to improve prescribing confidence.
Introduction: Newly developed biological medicines offer essential treatment for many acute and chronic conditions. In addition, the increasing availability of biosimilar drugs improve access to vital biologic treatments. Medical specialists prescribe biological medicines, thus the adoption of these products in the market heavily relies on their readiness to prescribe, and integrate them into clinical practice, which depends on their knowledge, perspectives, and beliefs. Aim: To review the scientific literature regarding knowledge and perceptions related to the use of originator biologics and biosimilars, along with the need for additional education on this topic. Material and methods: A literature search was conducted using journal databases, such as PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Scopus, with carefully selected search terms, and applying the inclusion criteria that match the aim of the study. Results: The majority of studies meeting the specified criteria were carried out in Europe and the USA, primarily in the form of brief surveys. Studies show that most of the medical specialists are familiar with the biologic medicines, however their measured knowledge was less extensive than their self-assessed knowledge. In general, a larger percentage of those who were surveyed expressed the need for additional education. Conclusions: Medical specialists’ knowledge and opinions towards biologics in general are highly variable, with a general observation that there is a need of increasing the knowledge in the field. Therefore, education is a key prerequisite for better understanding the differences among originator biologics and biosimilars, which will support their inclusion into treatment plans.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Trajchuleski et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: