The results of this survey can be used in defining strategic priorities and planning projects and awareness raising activities. The unmet needs of IBD patients can be better demonstrated and communicated to the public, health service managers and politicians.

Most patients were not familiar with biosimilars, and those who were had doubts and concerns about the biosimilars' safety and efficacy. The patients wished to be informed and involved in decision-making concerning biosimilars.

Biologics have transformed the treatment of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Biosimilars-biologic medicines with no clinically meaningful differences in safety or efficacy from licensed originators-can stimulate market competition and have the potential to expand patient access to biologics within the parameters of treatment recommendations. However, maximizing the benefits of biosimilars requires cooperation between multiple stakeholders. Regulators and developers should collaborate to ensure biosimilars reach patients rapidly without compromising stringent quality, safety, or efficacy standards. Pharmacoeconomic evaluations and payer policies should be updated following biosimilar market entry, minimizing the risk of imposing nonmedical barriers to biologic treatment. In RA, disparities between treatment guidelines and national reimbursement criteria could be addressed to ensure more uniform patient access to biologics and enable rheumatologists to effectively implement treat-to-target strategies. In IBD, the cost-effectiveness of biologic treatment earlier in the disease course is likely to improve when biosimilars are incorporated into pharmacoeconomic analyses. Patient understanding of biosimilars is crucial for treatment success and avoiding nocebo effects. Full understanding of biosimilars by physicians and carefully considered communication strategies can help support patients initiating or switching to biosimilars. Developers must operate efficiently to be sustainable, without undermining product quality, the reliability of the supply chain, or pharmacovigilance. Developers should also facilitate information sharing to meet the needs of other stakeholders. Such collaboration will help to ensure a sustainable future for both the biosimilar market and healthcare systems, supporting the availability of effective treatments for patients.

The increasing prevalence of inflammatory bowel disease and the high costs associated with biologic therapies suggest that biologics with lower costs, but no compromise on efficacy and safety, should be considered when developing a treatment plan for inflammatory bowel disease. Biosimilars offer a more cost-effective alternative, and although the European Medicines Agency has approved the use of biosimilars for many indications, including inflammatory bowel disease, patients may be concerned about the safety and efficacy of these agents. The updated Nurses–European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation statements, published in March 2018, recommend that inflammatory bowel disease nurses facilitate patient choice of biologic or biosimilar therapy. Nurses are pivotal in managing the challenges associated with patients transitioning to biosimilars. However, there is limited information available on how inflammatory bowel disease nurses can communicate the concept of biosimilars to patients and also on how best to support them before and during the switch from originators. This review article will focus on patients’ concerns regarding biosimilars and describe considerations for nurses when supporting patients transitioning from originators to biosimilars. Through nurse-led patient education and the use of structured communication strategies, as well as investment in managed switching programmes, patients will become more confident and adherent to their biosimilar therapy, and this may lead to overall reductions in health-care expenditure for inflammatory bowel disease.

IBD patients are mostly aware of the main signs and symptoms of anaemia. Oral iron is most commonly prescribed, but may cause dissatisfaction because of tolerability issues. Most patients prescribed intravenous iron are satisfied with treatment.