Rituximab reference vs biosimilar utilization for oncology vs nononcology indications.

OBJECTIVES: Limited data exist on the adoption of rituximab biosimilars vs the reference product by indication. Available data from real-world studies comparing rituximab biosimilar and reference use have focused predominantly on oncology indications. This is the first study to assess the utilization of the 3 US rituximab biosimilars vs the reference product. STUDY DESIGN: Comparative analysis. METHODS: Deidentified real-world data of rituximab, rituximab-abbs, rituximab-pvvr, and rituximab-arrx dispensations between December 31, 2018, and February 1, 2022, were extracted using Trisus Medication Compare (The Craneware Group). The primary outcome was rituximab reference vs biosimilar utilization for oncology vs nononcology indications. Results were stratified by on-label and off-label use and treatment settings. RESULTS: A total of 28,025 encounters were captured for rituximab and its biosimilars across 193 facilities (rituximab: n = 23,395; biosimilars, n = 4631 [rituximab-abbs: n = 2550; rituximab-pvvr, n = 2081; rituximab-arrx: n = 0]). Rituximab reference had higher dispensations for oncology (78.4%) and nononcology (88.3%) indications than its biosimilars (21.6% and 11.7%, respectively; P < .01). The 3-year annual trends from 2019 to 2021 revealed decreased rituximab reference utilization (99.99% to 40.1%) and increased biosimilar use (0.01% to 59.9%). Most oncology dispensations were on label (94.5%), whereas most nononcology dispensations were off label (73.6%; P < .01). A higher proportion of biosimilar use was attributed to on-label indications (67.7%; off-label, 32.2%) compared with rituximab reference (58.0% vs42.0%, respectively; P < .01). Nonacademic settings showed higher biosimilar adoption than academic settings (22.2% vs 10.3%, respectively; P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Real-world evidence shows an increase in rituximab biosimilar adoption over time, with higher adoption for oncology vs nononcology indications and in nonacademic settings.

Incorporating a peer-teaching, virtual, educational activity to teach newly approved medications in a senior seminar capstone course.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Peer teaching and serious gaming are effective pedagogical approaches to actively engage learners, foster collaboration, and promote student accountability for self-directed learning. Literature describing how students learn about and are assessed on knowledge of newly approved medications is lacking. The objective of this project is to describe the design and implementation of a peer-taught virtual educational gaming activity, assess impact on knowledge of newly approved medications, and describe student perceptions of the activity. EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITY AND SETTING: Pharmacy students in the fourth professional year developed and delivered a topic discussion focusing on newly approved medications to peers utilizing a virtual escape room gaming format. The activity was delivered via Zoom, Version 4.6.9 (Zoom Video Communications, Inc). A pre- and post-activity knowledge-based assessment and perception-based questionnaire were administered to participants. Observations regarding teamwork and communication were collected by facilitators. FINDINGS: Sixteen students participated in this activity. Mean scores on the knowledge quiz were higher post-activity compared to pre-activity (8.1 vs. 6.3). The activity was perceived positively by participants with 100% of respondents agreeing or strongly agreeing that they "enjoyed the escape room theme for the activity and would recommend it to a friend." Zoom was perceived an effective platform to deliver this activity. All facilitators observed students working effectively as a team to complete the activity. SUMMARY: Virtual gaming developed and facilitated by peer teachers may be an effective method for delivering educational content and positively influencing student learning.