scholarly journals Recent trends in brand-name and generic drug competition

2013 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 207-214 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henry Grabowski ◽  
Genia Long ◽  
Richard Mortimer
Author(s):  
Henry Grabowski ◽  
Genia Long ◽  
Richard Mortimer ◽  
Mehmet Bilginsoy
Keyword(s):  

2010 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 369-389 ◽  
Author(s):  
Toshiaki Iizuka ◽  
Kensuke Kubo

AbstractHistorically, brand-name pharmaceuticals have enjoyed long periods of market exclusivity in Japan, given the limited use of generics after patent expiration. To improve the efficiency of the health-care system, however, the government has recently implemented various policies aimed at increasing generic substitution. Although this has created expectations that the Japanese generic drug market may finally take off, to date, generic usage has increased only modestly. After reviewing the incentives of key market participants to choose generics, we argue that previous government policies did not provide proper incentives for pharmacies to boost generic substitution. We offer some recommendations that may help to increase generic usage.


Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 5441-5441
Author(s):  
Vasily Shuvaev ◽  
Mikhail Fominykh ◽  
Vera Udaleva ◽  
Irina I Zotova ◽  
Regina Golovchenko ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction. A generic drug is a pharmaceutical drug considered to be equivalent to a brand-name product. A generic drug has to contain the same active ingredients as those of the original formulation. Regulatory agencies used to require that generics be identical to their brand-name counterparts with regards to pharmacokinetic properties. In most cases, generic products are available after the patent protection given to a drug's original developer expires. In Russia, a patent protection lasts for a 10-year period from registration of the original drug. To this day, twelve Imatinib generics have been registered in Russia. Aim. To assess the safety and efficacy of Imatinib generics for treatment of newly diagnosed Chronic myelogenous leukemia patients that have been in our center since August 2012. Materials and methods. 30 newly diagnosed CML patients were started on generics. The drugs: 1) GenericPh 100 mg, in capsules (Ph-Syntez, Russia); 2) GenericG 100 mg, in tablets (Laboratorio TUTEUR S.A.C.I.F.I.A., Argentina); 3) GenericIm 100 mg, in tablets (Sandoz d.d. (Slovenia). Switching from one generic to another was done due to intolerance. We analyzed the range and frequencies of adverse events (AE), cumulative incidences of complete hematologic (CHR), major cytogenetic (MCyR), complete cytogenetic (CCyR), and early molecular responses (BCR-ABL<10% by IS), as well as the rate of BCR-ABL<1% by IS, major molecular (MMR) and molecular 4.0 log (MR4.0, BCR-ABL<0.01% by IS) responses at time-points according to the National CML diagnostic and treatment guidelines. The response rates were assessed only in regard to the generic treatment (with death, progression and switching to second-generation inhibitors as competing risks). Statistical analysis included descriptive statistics and cumulative incidence function. Results. Duration of the treatment with generics was 7-45 months, with a median of 13 months (GenericPh (27) + GenericG (2) + GenericIm (1)). No unexpected adverse events were observed during the Imatinib generics treatment. The generics tolerance did not differ from that of the original brand-name drug. Six patients were switched to second-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI2) due to Imatinib intolerance. One patient progressed to blastic phase at 3 months after diagnosis. Three deaths were registered (1 - due to CML and 2 due to concomitant diseases). Overall survival rate was 90% and CML-related mortality - 3%. CHR at 3 months of the treatment was achieved in 93% of the patients. Cumulative response rates for cytogenetic and molecular responses are presented in Table 1. MR4.0 was registered in 23% of patients during overall treatment. Seven patients were switched to TKI2 due to insufficient efficacy of Imatinib. At the time of analysis 13 patients remained on Imatinib generics treatment: 12 patients with CCyR and 1 with PCyR, including 10 patients with MMR. Conclusion. Use of generics demands evaluation of its equivalency and control during its adoption into clinical practice. In terms of efficacy or tolerance no significant differences between the Imatinib generics studied and the original brand-name drug in newly diagnosed CML patients were found. Disclosures Shuvaev: Pfizer: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Novartis pharma: Honoraria. Fominykh:BMS: Honoraria; Novartis Pharma: Honoraria.


2011 ◽  
Vol 30 (11) ◽  
pp. 2157-2166 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henry G. Grabowski ◽  
Margaret Kyle ◽  
Richard Mortimer ◽  
Genia Long ◽  
Noam Kirson
Keyword(s):  

2018 ◽  
Vol 63 (2) ◽  
pp. 237-245
Author(s):  
Wenqing Li

Both the courts and the economists have identified risk aversion as a justification for reverse payment agreements, especially the risk aversion of brand-name companies. However, existing economic researches show whether risk aversion can be a rationale for reverse payment agreements depends on the type of reverse payment agreements reached. In “complete” settlement agreement where a brand-name drug manufacturer provides consideration to a generic drug company to completely settle the patent litigation, with agreed-upon entry dates for the generic, risk aversion does not provide a justification for reverse payment, but asymmetry in risk aversion can be a rationale for reverse payment. In “partial” settlement agreement where a branded drug manufacturer provides consideration to a generic drug company in exchange for the generic to agree not to enter the market while they continue the patent litigation, it is not the risk aversion of the brand company, but the risk aversion of the generic company that can facilitate the parties to reach a partial settlement agreement with reverse payment that serves the procompetitive purpose.


2009 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
pp. 624-629 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. E. P. Bramley

The recent proliferation of brand names for prescription medications has made the clinician's task of identifying the corresponding generic drug substances more difficult. A survey of 86 anaesthetists and anaesthetic trainees at two Melbourne hospitals was conducted to measure the extent to which this was perceived to be a clinical problem. In addition, a theoretical test was administered to examine the ability of these anaesthetists to correctly identify generic drugs and therapeutic groups when only the brand name is provided. The results indicated this is perceived to be a genuine clinical problem, with more than 80% of respondents encountering unfamiliar trade names ‘often’ or ‘always’ and the test revealing that fewer than one third of commonly prescribed brand names were identified correctly.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document