Differential Legal Protections for Biologics vs Small-Molecule Drugs in the US.

Olivier J Wouters, Matthew Vogel, William B Feldman, Reed F Beall, Aaron S Kesselheim, S Sean Tu
{"title":"Differential Legal Protections for Biologics vs Small-Molecule Drugs in the US.","authors":"Olivier J Wouters, Matthew Vogel, William B Feldman, Reed F Beall, Aaron S Kesselheim, S Sean Tu","doi":"10.1001/jama.2024.16911","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Biologics approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) receive 12 years of guaranteed protection from biosimilar competition compared with 5 years of protection from generic competition for new small-molecule drugs. Under the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, biologics are exempt from selection for Medicare price negotiation for 11 years compared with 7 years for small-molecule drugs. Congress codified these differing legal protections on the premise that biologics require more time and resources to develop and have weaker patent protection, necessitating additional protections for manufacturers to recoup their development costs and generate adequate returns on investment.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To review empirical evidence from the US experience with biologics to analyze the assumptions underlying longer periods of market exclusivity and protection from price negotiation compared with small-molecule drugs.</p><p><strong>Evidence review: </strong>Recent data on development times, clinical trial success rates, research and development costs, patent protection, market exclusivity periods, revenues, and treatment costs of biologics vs small-molecule drugs were analyzed.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>The FDA approved 599 new therapeutic agents from 2009-2023, of which 159 (27%) were biologics and 440 (73%) were small-molecule drugs. Median development times were 12.6 years (IQR, 10.6-15.3 years) for biologics vs 12.7 years (IQR, 10.2-15.5 years) for small-molecule drugs (P = .76). Biologics had higher clinical trial success rates at every phase of development. Median development costs were estimated to be $3.0 billion (IQR, $1.3 billion-$5.5 billion) for biologics and $2.1 billion (IQR, $1.3 billion-$3.7 billion) for small-molecule drugs (P = .39). Biologics were protected by a median of 14 patents (IQR, 5-24 patents) compared with 3 patents (IQR, 2-5 patents) for small-molecule drugs (P < .001). The median time to biosimilar competition was 20.3 years (IQR, 16.9-21.7 years) compared with 12.6 years (IQR, 12.5-13.5 years) for small-molecule drugs. Biologics achieved higher median peak revenues ($1.1 billion in year 13; IQR, $0.5 billion-$2.9 billion) than small-molecule drugs ($0.5 billion in year 8; IQR, $0.1 billion-$1.2 billion; P = .01) and had higher median revenues in each year following FDA approval. The median annual cost of treatment was $92 000 (IQR, $31 000-$357 000) for biologics and $33 000 (IQR, $4000-$177 000) for small-molecule drugs (P = .005).</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>There is little evidence to support biologics having longer periods of market exclusivity or protection from negotiation. As a result of differential treatment, US law appears to overly reward the development of biologics relative to small-molecule drugs.</p>","PeriodicalId":17196,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Medical Association","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Medical Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2024.16911","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Importance: Biologics approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) receive 12 years of guaranteed protection from biosimilar competition compared with 5 years of protection from generic competition for new small-molecule drugs. Under the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, biologics are exempt from selection for Medicare price negotiation for 11 years compared with 7 years for small-molecule drugs. Congress codified these differing legal protections on the premise that biologics require more time and resources to develop and have weaker patent protection, necessitating additional protections for manufacturers to recoup their development costs and generate adequate returns on investment.

Objective: To review empirical evidence from the US experience with biologics to analyze the assumptions underlying longer periods of market exclusivity and protection from price negotiation compared with small-molecule drugs.

Evidence review: Recent data on development times, clinical trial success rates, research and development costs, patent protection, market exclusivity periods, revenues, and treatment costs of biologics vs small-molecule drugs were analyzed.

Findings: The FDA approved 599 new therapeutic agents from 2009-2023, of which 159 (27%) were biologics and 440 (73%) were small-molecule drugs. Median development times were 12.6 years (IQR, 10.6-15.3 years) for biologics vs 12.7 years (IQR, 10.2-15.5 years) for small-molecule drugs (P = .76). Biologics had higher clinical trial success rates at every phase of development. Median development costs were estimated to be $3.0 billion (IQR, $1.3 billion-$5.5 billion) for biologics and $2.1 billion (IQR, $1.3 billion-$3.7 billion) for small-molecule drugs (P = .39). Biologics were protected by a median of 14 patents (IQR, 5-24 patents) compared with 3 patents (IQR, 2-5 patents) for small-molecule drugs (P < .001). The median time to biosimilar competition was 20.3 years (IQR, 16.9-21.7 years) compared with 12.6 years (IQR, 12.5-13.5 years) for small-molecule drugs. Biologics achieved higher median peak revenues ($1.1 billion in year 13; IQR, $0.5 billion-$2.9 billion) than small-molecule drugs ($0.5 billion in year 8; IQR, $0.1 billion-$1.2 billion; P = .01) and had higher median revenues in each year following FDA approval. The median annual cost of treatment was $92 000 (IQR, $31 000-$357 000) for biologics and $33 000 (IQR, $4000-$177 000) for small-molecule drugs (P = .005).

Conclusions and relevance: There is little evidence to support biologics having longer periods of market exclusivity or protection from negotiation. As a result of differential treatment, US law appears to overly reward the development of biologics relative to small-molecule drugs.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
美国对生物制剂与小分子药物的法律保护差异。
重要性:美国食品和药物管理局 (FDA) 批准的生物制剂可在 12 年内免受生物仿制药竞争的影响,而新的小分子药物可在 5 年内免受仿制药竞争的影响。根据《2022 年通货膨胀抑制法案》,生物制剂在 11 年内免于医疗保险价格谈判的选择,而小分子药物则为 7 年。国会将这些不同的法律保护编入法律的前提是,生物制剂的开发需要更多的时间和资源,而且专利保护较弱,因此有必要为生产商提供额外的保护,以收回开发成本并获得足够的投资回报:回顾美国生物制剂方面的经验证据,分析与小分子药物相比更长的市场独占期和价格谈判保护所依据的假设:对生物制剂与小分子药物的研发时间、临床试验成功率、研发成本、专利保护、市场独占期、收入和治疗成本等方面的最新数据进行了分析:2009-2023年,美国食品及药物管理局批准了599种新的治疗药物,其中159种(27%)是生物制剂,440种(73%)是小分子药物。生物制剂的中位研发时间为 12.6 年(IQR,10.6-15.3 年),小分子药物为 12.7 年(IQR,10.2-15.5 年)(P = .76)。生物制剂在每个开发阶段的临床试验成功率都较高。生物制剂的中位开发成本估计为 30 亿美元(IQR,13 亿-55 亿美元),小分子药物的中位开发成本估计为 21 亿美元(IQR,13 亿-37 亿美元)(P = .39)。生物制剂受 14 项专利(IQR,5-24 项)的中位数保护,而小分子药物受 3 项专利(IQR,2-5 项)的中位数保护(P 结论和相关性):几乎没有证据支持生物制剂享有更长的市场独占期或免于谈判的保护。由于待遇不同,相对于小分子药物,美国法律似乎过度奖励生物制剂的开发。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
45.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: JAMA, published continuously since 1883, is an international peer-reviewed general medical journal. JAMA is a member of the JAMA Network, a consortium of peer-reviewed, general medical and specialty publications.
期刊最新文献
Differential Legal Protections for Biologics vs Small-Molecule Drugs in the US. MD-Granting Medical Schools in the US, 2023-2024. Association of Severe Maternal Morbidity With Subsequent Birth. Decline of Mpox Antibody Responses After Modified Vaccinia Ankara-Bavarian Nordic Vaccination. Restrictive vs Liberal Transfusion Strategy in Patients With Acute Brain Injury: The TRAIN Randomized Clinical Trial.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1