TABLE 5.

Information and results of pharmacoeconomic evaluations by budget impact analysis.

Study	Reference	Country	Time horizon	Budget Impact ($)	Sensitivity analysis
G-CSF biosimilars vs. G-CSF
Trautman et al. (Trautman et al., 2019)	Filgrastim	United States	1 year	0.47 M	Percentage as home administration (±25%); cost per package (±20%); percentage using short-acting G-CSF(±5%); filgrastim formulary status (tier 2–4); future market share(±20%)
EPO biosimilars vs. EPO
Abraham et al. (Abraham et al., 2014)	Epoetin α	5 EU countries	6 cycles	1.80 –2.36 M	—
Nikolaidi et al. (Nikolaidi et al., 2013)	Epoetin α Epoetin β Darbepoetin α	Greece	6 cycles	2.08 M	—
MAB biosimilars vs. MAB
Lee et al. (Lee et al., 2019)	Trastuzumab	28 EU countries	1 year, 5 years	1 year: 68.2 –160.0 M; 5 years: 1.1–2.67 B	Discount rate of biosimilar (±20%); uptake rate of biosimilar (±20%); patient percentage using originator (±20%); no of cycles of subsequent doses (±20%)
Rognoni, et al. (Rognoni et al., 2018)	Rituximab	Italy	1–5 years	1 year: 14.7 M 5 years: 32.1 M	—
Cesarec et al. (Cesarec and Likić, 2017)	Trastuzumab	Croatia	1 year	0.3 –0.8 M	Uptake rate of biosimilar (±20%); cancer incidence (±10%); patient weight (±10%); no of cycles (±1); no. of patients on intravenous trastuzumab (±10%)
Gulácsi et al. (Gulácsi et al., 2017)	Rituximab	28 EU countries	1–3 years	1 year: 75.8 –126.3 M 3 years: 760.0 M		Discount rate of biosimilar (±10%); uptake rate of biosimilar (±10%); patient volume (±10%); mean body surface area (±10%)

Note: All parameters inputting in sensitivity analyses were assumed without any foundation. M: million; B: billion; — means no reporting.