Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Narrative review examines repeated biosimilar switching outcomes in real-world healthcare settings, highlighting the critical role of structured communication and robust governance frameworks.
Introduction In health systems outside the United States (US) with longer biosimilar experience, use has shifted from a question of adoption to one of implementation. Tenders, formularies, and payer policies are progressively driving reference-product-to-biosimilar, biosimilar-to-biosimilar, switchback transitions, and retransitioning in routine care, posing significant clinical, operational, and governance difficulties.AREAS covered This structured narrative review examines evidence published from 1 January 2015 to 15 March 2026 on repeated switching within a single reference-product family. It focuses on efficacy, safety, immunogenicity, persistence, switchback, clinician-led and non-medical switching, nocebo mechanisms, communication, patient education, device support, pharmacovigilance, and traceability.EXPERT opinion While data on repeated and cross-switching are promising yet nascent, particularly outside tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors and beyond short-term follow-up periods, current evidence unequivocally supports initial switching. Successful outcomes depend upon pharmacovigilance, traceability, structured communication, and device support, in addition to molecular comparability. Injection-site pain during adalimumab transitions may be attributed to citrate content, pH, injection volume, or device variations, and should not be prematurely categorized as a nocebo effect. Explicit governance frameworks for repeated-switch programs and prospective, implementation-sensitive evidence are requisite for future clinical advancements.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Meslamani et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: