The Trump administration’s recent crackdown on direct-to-consumer (DTC) drug advertising got me thinking. I’m of an age where the shows I watch on television or stream are rife with DTC advertising for diabetes drugs and biologics to treat autoimmune disease, rare disease, macular degeneration, and other ophthalmologic disorders.
I was never a fan of DTC advertising for specific pharmaceutical products in the name of education. I never bought the line that these ads were for anything else than brand exposure. In the case of “unbranded” ads that truly educated people about a disease, the unstated purpose was to lay the groundwork for an investigational product that will target the disease once approved by FDA.
The United States is one of the only countries permitting DTC pharmaceutical advertising, and I don’t believe that residents of this country have better life expectancies or quality of life than citizens of many other western and central European countries, none of which permit DTC advertising. Certainly, there is no evidence that DTC advertising improves patient health. Obviously, it improves the financial health of the networks and web-based vehicles carrying DTC ads.
DTC Drug Ads Do Sell Drugs, Why not Biosimilar Education?
For many years, pharma companies paid large sums to run DTC ads for a reason. They work. They register more prescriptions than if the company did not run DTC ads. Shouldn’t the biosimilar industry take advantage of the broad access DTC advertising provides?
This marketing channel can emphasize the benefits of biosimilars in general to biological products. It is true that this form of advertising and a full campaign could cost major dollars. It is also true that the main lever a biosimilar product has against the biologic is lower cost, which may not directly concern consumers (because of their easy access to copay coupons for example).
So we are not talking about DTC advertising for a particular biosimilar brand or even drug category, but for the benefits of biosimilars overall. This would not be subject to any specific additional DTC regulations. And it would have to be funded by a trade group such as the Biosimilars Forum or the Biosimilars Council.
It may be that the opportunity for broad public education about biosimilars through broadcast networks or streaming services has passed. But if pharma companies’ product messaging through this channel was considered successful for years, shouldn’t the biosimilar community consider it? Perhaps they have and it was tabled because of cost for a specific issue in creating and honing such a campaign. We’re not talking about a Super Bowl ad. We’re talking about a 30-second advertisement during the local or national news, or a local broadcast of a sporting event. You may not reach a youngish audience, but you will reach older people like me—the ones who are most frequently using biologics to treat chronic conditions.
Biocon Biologics’ Approval of Denosumab Biosimilar
On September 17, 2025, Biocon announced that it received FDA approval for Bosaya and Aukelso (denosumab-kyqq), its denosumab biosimilars for reference products Prolia and Xgeva, respectively. The biosimilars are approved for the osteoporosis and oncology-related bone indications of the reference products.
This approval follows on the heels of another denosumab approval announced September 2nd, adding to the heavy competition for denosumab products. Biocon Biologics’ did not provide information about product launch and pricing in its press release.
