Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Pharma v. Pharma or Pharma & Pharma: The Legal Interface Between the Makers of Original and Copied Versions of Medicines Innovators, Generic Drug Makers, Exclusivity Provisions, Antitrust Prohibitions, New Biologics Regulatory Pathways: Policy Alternatives for Navigating the Maze AIPLA Antitrust, Biotechnology and Chemical Practice Committees © 2008 Dechert LLP October 23, 2008 What is a “generic drug” and what makes generic drug competition unique? • What is a “generic drug” and how does it get to market? – ANDAs, bioequivalence, and substitutability. • How does generic drug competition differ from other types of competition? – Pricing differences after generic launch. – Market share changes. – Residual value of trademarks & goodwill. – Role of third-party payors in healthcare. 2 Will “follow-on biologics” (FOBs) differ from “generic drugs,” if Congress authorizes them? • Why might the FDA approval pathway for biologics differ from the Hatch-Waxman (H-W) pathway for drugs? – Bioequivalence for drugs v. interchangeability for biologics. – Data package needed for follow-on products. – Would a standard less than interchangeability suffice? • Should a law today account for new technology developed in the future? – Explicit statutory standards vs. FDA regulatory flexibility. – What will change by 2020? 2030? 3 FDA approval of full NDAs and Abbreviated NDAs (ANDAs): Non-patent “exclusivity” • Key provisions that delay FDA approvals: – Orphan drug: First NDA approval for an “orphan indication” bars approval of the same drug for the indication for 7 years. – Pediatric: All patent or non-patent exclusivity periods that otherwise exist are extended for a further 6 months. – ANDA moratorium: No ANDA can be filed during the 4-year period after the NDA approval for an NCE drug. – Linkage stay: If a patent challenge is made in an ANDA and a lawsuit filed within 45 days, the ANDA approval is stayed for up 30 months if needed to resolve infringement issues. – First-filing generic: No other ANDA can be approved until 180 days after the first-filing generic company starts marketing. 4 Would H-W exclusivity, linkage provisions provide the best model for FOBs? • Has non-patent exclusivity for drugs under HatchWaxman worked well enough to be a model? – Data package exclusivity: ANDA moratorium periods. – Linkage exclusivity: 30-month litigation stays. • What other options might Congress consider? – Eliminate data & linkage exclusivity: depend only on patents. – 14+ years of data exclusivity, tied to H-W patent term restoration cap. • Should non-patent exclusivity period under H-W for small molecules be re-visited? 5 Should generic/FOB manufacturers have registration exclusivity periods? • How does generic/FOB exclusivity registration differ from data package exclusivity? – What policy goals should registration exclusivity achieve? – What problems does Hatch-Waxman 180-day exclusivity create? • How would elimination of market exclusivity change generic business models? – Would 14+ years of DPE change the equation? 6 What are “authorized generics”; why do they exist; and what policy issues do they raise? • What is an “authorized generic”? – H-W loopholes; successful defense, failure-to-sue. • What are the antitrust and policy issues with authorized generics? – Does generic exclusivity provide an incentive or disincentive to challenge innovator patents? – What if generic exclusivity were abolished? – Is the FTC correct that an exclusive authorized generic is an illegal “reverse payment”? 7 Should H-W patent settlements be treated differently from other civil litigation resolution? • Should some line be drawn between an acceptable value to the generic company and an anticompetitive “reverse payment”? – OK, but only if anticompetitive effect operates within the scope of the patent? – OK, but only if “value” produces a pro-competitive effect in the market affected by the settlement? – OK, but only if payment doesn’t exceed reasonable litigation costs? – OK, but only if value to the generic company does not exceed what the generic would have received on entry? 8 Should there be a prohibition on “side deals”? • OK, if procompetitive in the relevant market – Example: settlement of foreign patent dispute with early entry • OK, but only at full value (no subsidy to the generic)? • Not OK: Illegal if it provides some value to the generic and would not have been done “but for” the settlement? – See FTC Cephalon complaint 9