Delayed access to generic medicine: a comment on the Hatch-Waxman Act and the "approval bottleneck".

IF 1 3区 社会学 Q2 LAW Fordham Law Review Pub Date : 2009-11-01
Anjur N Patel
{"title":"Delayed access to generic medicine: a comment on the Hatch-Waxman Act and the \"approval bottleneck\".","authors":"Anjur N Patel","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Prescription drug costs can be astronomical. The advent of generic drugs, which sell at substantially lower prices than their brand-name counterparts, can save consumers billions of dollars per year. The Hatch-Waxman Act, which governs the introduction of generic pharmaceuticals into the marketplace, produces an undesired side effect-the \"approval bottleneck.\" This Comment examines the \"approval bottleneck\"-a potential roadblock to the generic drug approval process, and comments on attempts to alleviate the problem.This Comment suggests that developments in statutes and case law have made leaps in attempting to alleviate the \"approval bottleneck\" problem.The Comment evaluates these developments, which include (1) the ability of a subsequent Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA) filer to trigger the generic exclusivity period of the first ANDA filer; (2) the forfeiture provisions; (3) declaratory judgments and the relaxed declaratory judgment test; and (4) the rulings on covenants not to sue. Despite these attempts, however, the potential harm to consumers resulting from delayed access to generic medicines remains.</p>","PeriodicalId":47517,"journal":{"name":"Fordham Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Fordham Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Prescription drug costs can be astronomical. The advent of generic drugs, which sell at substantially lower prices than their brand-name counterparts, can save consumers billions of dollars per year. The Hatch-Waxman Act, which governs the introduction of generic pharmaceuticals into the marketplace, produces an undesired side effect-the "approval bottleneck." This Comment examines the "approval bottleneck"-a potential roadblock to the generic drug approval process, and comments on attempts to alleviate the problem.This Comment suggests that developments in statutes and case law have made leaps in attempting to alleviate the "approval bottleneck" problem.The Comment evaluates these developments, which include (1) the ability of a subsequent Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA) filer to trigger the generic exclusivity period of the first ANDA filer; (2) the forfeiture provisions; (3) declaratory judgments and the relaxed declaratory judgment test; and (4) the rulings on covenants not to sue. Despite these attempts, however, the potential harm to consumers resulting from delayed access to generic medicines remains.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
仿制药获得的延迟:对哈奇-韦克斯曼法案和“审批瓶颈”的评论。
处方药的成本可能是天文数字。仿制药的出现,其售价大大低于品牌药,每年可以为消费者节省数十亿美元。哈奇-韦克斯曼法案(Hatch-Waxman Act)管理仿制药进入市场的过程,产生了一个不受欢迎的副作用——“审批瓶颈”。本评论探讨了“审批瓶颈”——仿制药审批过程的潜在障碍,并对缓解该问题的尝试提出了评论。本评论表明,成文法和判例法的发展在试图缓解“批准瓶颈”问题方面取得了飞跃。评论对这些进展进行了评估,其中包括:(1)后续简略新药申请(ANDA)申报者触发首个ANDA申报者的仿制药独占期的能力;(二)没收规定;(3)宣告性判决和宣告性判决放宽测试;(4)关于不起诉契约的裁决。然而,尽管有这些努力,延迟获得仿制药对消费者造成的潜在危害仍然存在。
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
1.10
自引率
12.50%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Fordham Law Review is a scholarly journal serving the legal profession and the public by discussing current legal issues. Approximately 75 articles, written by students or submitted by outside authors, are published each year. Each volume comprises six books, three each semester, totaling over 3,000 pages. Managed by a board of up to eighteen student editors, the Law Review is a working journal, not merely an honor society. Nevertheless, Law Review membership is considered among the highest scholarly achievements at the Law School.
期刊最新文献
Using a Hybrid Securities Test to Tackle the Problem of Pyramid Fraud Resurrecting Free Speech Managing the Misinformation Marketplace: The First Amendment and the Fight Against Fake News Airbnb in New York City: whose privacy rights are threatened by a Government Data grab? Free money, but not tax-free: a proposal for the tax treatment of cryptocurrency hard forks
×
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