用后缘引导:方便患者选择胰岛素产品。

IF 2.5 2区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS Journal of Law and the Biosciences Pub Date : 2023-07-01 DOI:10.1093/jlb/lsad033
Robin Feldman
{"title":"用后缘引导:方便患者选择胰岛素产品。","authors":"Robin Feldman","doi":"10.1093/jlb/lsad033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Insulin prices have risen sharply, despite a century since its introduction. Against this backdrop, companies have discontinued dozens of insulin products. Discontinuation could relate to safety or effectiveness, or to the overwhelming benefits of newer products. On the other hand, discontinuation could suggest strategic behavior hampering competition and supporting prices. To test these theories, this project examined every insulin discontinuation, analyzing the role discontinuations play in insulin affordability. No evidence emerged of any discontinuation for safety or effectiveness. Rather, dozens of viable products were removed from the market, followed by more expensive versions, often with little or no clinical improvement. Insulin pens with a phone app may provide advantages, for example. However, for older patients, who may find the technology confusing, or for patients with budget constraints, the value proposition falters. Moreover, discontinuation blocks biosimilars from market entry because they cannot demonstrate biosimilarity without the drug. The problem exists for all biosimilars. If there are willing buyers and willing sellers of clinically effective products that are off-patent, entry should be facilitated. This article suggests a requirement that companies deposit samples at the time of FDA approval, laying the groundwork for later entry of trailing-edge products with clinically viable outcomes.","PeriodicalId":56266,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law and the Biosciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10718803/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Leading with the trailing edge: facilitating patient choice for insulin products.\",\"authors\":\"Robin Feldman\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jlb/lsad033\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Insulin prices have risen sharply, despite a century since its introduction. Against this backdrop, companies have discontinued dozens of insulin products. Discontinuation could relate to safety or effectiveness, or to the overwhelming benefits of newer products. On the other hand, discontinuation could suggest strategic behavior hampering competition and supporting prices. To test these theories, this project examined every insulin discontinuation, analyzing the role discontinuations play in insulin affordability. No evidence emerged of any discontinuation for safety or effectiveness. Rather, dozens of viable products were removed from the market, followed by more expensive versions, often with little or no clinical improvement. Insulin pens with a phone app may provide advantages, for example. However, for older patients, who may find the technology confusing, or for patients with budget constraints, the value proposition falters. Moreover, discontinuation blocks biosimilars from market entry because they cannot demonstrate biosimilarity without the drug. The problem exists for all biosimilars. If there are willing buyers and willing sellers of clinically effective products that are off-patent, entry should be facilitated. This article suggests a requirement that companies deposit samples at the time of FDA approval, laying the groundwork for later entry of trailing-edge products with clinically viable outcomes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":56266,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Law and the Biosciences\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10718803/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Law and the Biosciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsad033\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Law and the Biosciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsad033","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

尽管胰岛素问世已有一个世纪,但其价格仍大幅上涨。在此背景下,公司已经停产了数十种胰岛素产品。停产可能与安全性或有效性有关,也可能与新产品的压倒性优势有关。另一方面,停产也可能是阻碍竞争和支持价格的战略行为。为了验证这些理论,本项目研究了每一种胰岛素的停产情况,分析了停产在胰岛素可负担性方面所起的作用。没有证据表明任何停产是出于安全性或有效性的考虑。相反,数十种可行的产品被撤出市场,随之而来的是更昂贵的版本,但临床效果往往改善甚微或根本没有改善。例如,带有手机应用程序的胰岛素笔可能具有优势。但是,对于年长的患者来说,他们可能会觉得这种技术令人困惑,或者对于预算有限的患者来说,这种产品的价值主张就会动摇。此外,停产会阻碍生物仿制药进入市场,因为它们无法证明没有药物的生物相似性。所有生物仿制药都存在这个问题。如果临床有效的非专利产品有买方和卖方的意愿,就应该为其进入市场提供便利。本文建议要求企业在获得 FDA 批准时交存样品,为以后具有临床可行性的前沿产品进入市场奠定基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Leading with the trailing edge: facilitating patient choice for insulin products.
Abstract Insulin prices have risen sharply, despite a century since its introduction. Against this backdrop, companies have discontinued dozens of insulin products. Discontinuation could relate to safety or effectiveness, or to the overwhelming benefits of newer products. On the other hand, discontinuation could suggest strategic behavior hampering competition and supporting prices. To test these theories, this project examined every insulin discontinuation, analyzing the role discontinuations play in insulin affordability. No evidence emerged of any discontinuation for safety or effectiveness. Rather, dozens of viable products were removed from the market, followed by more expensive versions, often with little or no clinical improvement. Insulin pens with a phone app may provide advantages, for example. However, for older patients, who may find the technology confusing, or for patients with budget constraints, the value proposition falters. Moreover, discontinuation blocks biosimilars from market entry because they cannot demonstrate biosimilarity without the drug. The problem exists for all biosimilars. If there are willing buyers and willing sellers of clinically effective products that are off-patent, entry should be facilitated. This article suggests a requirement that companies deposit samples at the time of FDA approval, laying the groundwork for later entry of trailing-edge products with clinically viable outcomes.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Law and the Biosciences
Journal of Law and the Biosciences Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
5.90%
发文量
35
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Law and the Biosciences (JLB) is the first fully Open Access peer-reviewed legal journal focused on the advances at the intersection of law and the biosciences. A co-venture between Duke University, Harvard University Law School, and Stanford University, and published by Oxford University Press, this open access, online, and interdisciplinary academic journal publishes cutting-edge scholarship in this important new field. The Journal contains original and response articles, essays, and commentaries on a wide range of topics, including bioethics, neuroethics, genetics, reproductive technologies, stem cells, enhancement, patent law, and food and drug regulation. JLB is published as one volume with three issues per year with new articles posted online on an ongoing basis.
期刊最新文献
The new EU-US data protection framework's implications for healthcare. The new regulation of non-medical neurotechnologies in the European Union: overview and reflection. Implementing the human right to science in the context of health: introduction to the special issue. Biosimilar approval pathways: comparing the roles of five medicines regulators. Industry price guarantees for publicly funded medicines: learning from Project NextGen for pandemics and beyond.
×
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