Physician Perspectives on Subsequent Entry Biologics

On March 31, 2015 BIOTECanada hosted a webinar for patient group representatives sharing the results of the Canadian Physician Survey on SEBs, a project commissioned by BIOTECanada’s SEB Task Force and the Alliance for Safe Biologic Medicines (ASBM). BIOTECanada invited Michael Reilly, Executive Director of the ASBM to present the survey results. Click here to view the full presentation in English. To view the French Translation click here


427 physicians surveyed from British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario and Quebec. Respondents therapeutic area: dermatologists, gastroenterologists, internists, oncologists, pulmonologists, neurologists, urologists, nephrologists, rheumatologists, neurologists and endocrinologists. Misconceptions about SEBs, along with physician prescribing and recording practices, highlight the need for a distinguishable naming scheme for all biologics, including SEBs.

  • Only 10% responded they are very familiar with subsequent entry biologics (SEBs)
  • 62% replied that they thought if two medicines have the same non-proprietary scientific name, that a patient could receive either biologic product and expect the same result
  • 76% responded that if two biologic medicines have the same non-proprietary name that they are approved for the same indications
  • 79% believe that Health Canada should insist on a distinct non-proprietary names for every biologic or SEB product they approve, with the majority (54%) identifying unique non-proprietary names as their preferred method