Healthy Skepticism Library item: 19254

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

Publication type: news

Silverman E
Senators Reintroduce Pay-To-Delay Legislation
Pharmalot 2011 Jan 26
http://www.pharmalot.com/2011/01/senators-reintroduce-pay-to-delay-legislation/

Full text:

A pair of US Senators have reintroduced legislation that would limit the so-called pay-to-delay deals that remain one of the hottest controversies enveloping the pharmaceutical industry. The move comes after the House and Senate last month failed to agree on an appropriations bill, which included pay-to-delay restrictions.
You may recall that pay-to-delay settlements involve agreements in which brand-name and generic drugmakers settle patent disputes by exchanging a payment for a commitment to refrain from marketing a generic off the market for a set period of time. However, the Federal Trade Commission calls these deals anti-competitive and force consumers and government healthcare programs to pay high prices. A Congressional Budget Office report estimated the federal government could save nearly $2.7 billion over 10 years if the deals were restricted.
And so the FTC has been lobbying Congress to enact legislation to restrict the deals (look here). Meanwhile, the issue has divided courts across the country, which is why the Supreme Court was asked to review the topic and settle the matter (back story). Numerous state Attorneys General oppose the deals (look here) and, separately, dozens of drugmakers are fightiing in a different federal court to keep details under wrap (read this).
“Generic drugs save consumers and the federal government money, to the tune of billions of dollars a year. But in order to freeze out competition and delay entry of low cost generic drugs for consumers, brand-name drug companies pay-off generic manufactures to keep their products off the market. It is past time to put an end to these backroom deals and pass this bipartisan legislation,” says US Senator Herb Kohl, a Wisconsin Democrat who, along with Iowa Republican Chuck Grassley, submitted the bill (read the legislation here).
They argue that, following appeals court decisions in 2005, more deals have been struck. In the four years following the court cases, 63 out of 194 patent settlements had provisions in which a brand-name drugmaker made payments to generic rivals in exchange for delaying launches of copycat meds. And in 2009 alone, there were 19 such agreements.