Pay for delay is not right for generics

Apparently there are senators from both parties seeking to remove a ban on generic drug settlements from an upcoming appropriations bill. The proposal would stop brand-name drug makers from making deals with generic manufacturers to keep generics off the market.

I’m not sure why we would need such legislation. That kind of deal sounds like the kind of collusion that should be impermissible under competition/anti-trust law.

Here are some of my other blogs on generic drugs:

It’s unfair to keep generics off the market

Pay for delay in generic drugs isn’t good for the patient

Read Full Post »

Pay for delay in generic drugs isn’t good for patients

Our health care and patent system is designed to give pharmaceutical companies strong financial incentives to develop new drugs. The system is also set up for innovative products to go generic after a time. This makes those products inexpensive. There’s concern, though, that some companies may collude to keep generics off the market. This could happen if the innovator company pays generic manufacturers not to market a product.

There’s something that just doesn’t sound right about that. Congress is working on legislation to stop the practice, and the House has approved legislation to restrict the ability of companies to enter agreements that keep generic medicines off the market. (U.S. House Approves Restrictions on Brand-Name Drug Agreements,).

Innovator companies and generic manufacturers may have disagreements on when a drug should become available as a generic. These disagreements can lead to litigation. Ideally, the solution to those disagreements shouldn’t be deals that pay off generic companies to keep generic drugs off the market.  Deals like that don’t help patients.

Read Full Post »