Background/Purpose: The goals of this project were two-fold: The primary goal was to provide clinicians who treat rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients with a better understanding of the manufacturing process for biosimilars and secondarily, present the major patient questions and concerns when it comes to switching from an originator therapy to a biosimilar so that both the clinicians and patients are better prepared for those discussions.

Methods: The inclusion of patients in the content development phase helped provide both the clinical faculty and patients with insight that wouldn’t otherwise have been uncovered. Patients were included in the content development process and the one-hour, CME accredited, panel discussion as they’re really the content experts when it comes to experience with the various therapies, their administration and potential side effects. We worked with our clinical faculty and RA/IBD patients to identify key concerns and questions about biosimilars to identify best practices for patient-clinician discourse and co-creation of treatment plans based off the patient survey results.

Results: Feedback from 250 RA/IBD patients helped form content for the educational intervention. There were 458 learners of the CME activity. Test scores increased by 139% across 6 questions from pre (39% correct, SD 24.7) to post (93% correct, SD 0.9) with a large effect size (Cohen’s d = 1.93). Knowledge increase: 7-fold increase in correct answers from pre (12%) to post (84%) regarding the fact that, according to a systematic review of physician perception on biosimilar uptake in 9 different studies, the “implications of pharmacist-led substitution of biologics with biosimilars” was cited as a concern by the majority of the physicians. Although the data from our patient survey did not reveal statistically significant trends, there is quite a bit of anecdotal and experiential evidence that patients who have already been on biologics may have more concerns about or be less willing to switch to a biosimilar.

55% of learners felt more prepared to answer patient questions about biosimilars, and 50% felt better able to explain to their colleagues when and how biosimilars can be safely used. 27% would more often consider switching from a biologic to a biosimilar as appropriate in patients with RA or IBD.

The Potential Patient Impact Factor Analysis, which is a national-scope medical claims database-based analysis that uses diagnostic and prescription data allowed us to determine the number of annual RA/IBD patient treatments managed annually for the 91 learners who were actively treating RA/IBD patients. These 91 learners alone managed a minimum of 53,318 patient treatments annually for their RA and IBD patients.

Conclusion: Utilizing patient surveys is an economical and efficient way to bring the collective patient’s voices to a CME initiative. Feedback from learners has been extremely positive and the inclusion of the patient’s perspective also seems to have a positive impact on outcomes as it helps the learners put the clinical recommendations into context that’s patient-centric.

« Back to ACR Convergence 2022

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/is-similar-the-same-how-we-incorporated-feedback-from-250-patients-into-a-cme-activity-on-biosimilars/