{"title":"印度生产新的非专利抗逆转录病毒药物:对全球获得抗艾滋病毒药物的影响","authors":"K. Venkatesh, N. Kumarasamy, K. Mayer","doi":"10.2217/HIV.09.55","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"India’s ruling on patent protection India recently rejected patent applications on two antiretrovirals (ARVs), darunavir and tenofovir, which ensures the continued generic manufacturing of these drugs at substantially reduced costs compared with proprietary formulations [1]. The ruling by India’s Patent Office (IPO) to reject the exclusive licensing of the nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor tenofovir (Gilead Sciences, CA, USA) and protease inhibitor (PI) darunavir (Tibotec Pharmaceuticals, NJ, USA) also allows other countries to import generic versions produced in India. Cipla, the Mumbai-based generic drug manufacturer, had filed cases against both companies. Even before the anticipated outcome, Gilead had already offered 13 Indian drug manufactures the licensing rights to manufacture tenofovir, but with the caveat that the Indian manufacturers purchase the active drug ingredient from Gilead and that the product be sold only to the poorest 95 countries (which does not include middle-income countries, such as China and Brazil). The patent rejection potentially opens up the market for generic drug manufactures to further drive down the cost of these two ARVs, and may have wider implications for the future development and distribution of ARVs.","PeriodicalId":88510,"journal":{"name":"HIV therapy","volume":"22 1","pages":"1-4"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Indian manufacture of new generic antiretrovirals: implications for global access to anti-HIV drugs\",\"authors\":\"K. Venkatesh, N. Kumarasamy, K. Mayer\",\"doi\":\"10.2217/HIV.09.55\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"India’s ruling on patent protection India recently rejected patent applications on two antiretrovirals (ARVs), darunavir and tenofovir, which ensures the continued generic manufacturing of these drugs at substantially reduced costs compared with proprietary formulations [1]. The ruling by India’s Patent Office (IPO) to reject the exclusive licensing of the nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor tenofovir (Gilead Sciences, CA, USA) and protease inhibitor (PI) darunavir (Tibotec Pharmaceuticals, NJ, USA) also allows other countries to import generic versions produced in India. Cipla, the Mumbai-based generic drug manufacturer, had filed cases against both companies. Even before the anticipated outcome, Gilead had already offered 13 Indian drug manufactures the licensing rights to manufacture tenofovir, but with the caveat that the Indian manufacturers purchase the active drug ingredient from Gilead and that the product be sold only to the poorest 95 countries (which does not include middle-income countries, such as China and Brazil). The patent rejection potentially opens up the market for generic drug manufactures to further drive down the cost of these two ARVs, and may have wider implications for the future development and distribution of ARVs.\",\"PeriodicalId\":88510,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"HIV therapy\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"1-4\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2010-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"HIV therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2217/HIV.09.55\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"HIV therapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2217/HIV.09.55","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4
摘要
印度最近驳回了darunavir和tenofovir两种抗逆转录病毒药物(arv)的专利申请,这确保了与专利制剂相比,这些药物的仿制生产成本大大降低[1]。印度专利局(IPO)拒绝核苷类逆转录酶抑制剂替诺福韦(Gilead Sciences, CA, USA)和蛋白酶抑制剂darunavir (Tibotec Pharmaceuticals, NJ, USA)的独家许可的裁决也允许其他国家进口印度生产的仿制药。总部位于孟买的仿制药制造商Cipla对这两家公司提起了诉讼。甚至在预期结果出现之前,吉利德就已经向13家印度制药商提供了替诺福韦的生产许可,但有一个警告,即印度制药商必须从吉利德购买活性药物成分,而且该产品只能出售给最贫穷的95个国家(不包括中国和巴西等中等收入国家)。专利驳回可能为仿制药制造商打开市场,进一步降低这两种抗逆转录病毒药物的成本,并可能对未来抗逆转录病毒药物的开发和分销产生更广泛的影响。
Indian manufacture of new generic antiretrovirals: implications for global access to anti-HIV drugs
India’s ruling on patent protection India recently rejected patent applications on two antiretrovirals (ARVs), darunavir and tenofovir, which ensures the continued generic manufacturing of these drugs at substantially reduced costs compared with proprietary formulations [1]. The ruling by India’s Patent Office (IPO) to reject the exclusive licensing of the nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitor tenofovir (Gilead Sciences, CA, USA) and protease inhibitor (PI) darunavir (Tibotec Pharmaceuticals, NJ, USA) also allows other countries to import generic versions produced in India. Cipla, the Mumbai-based generic drug manufacturer, had filed cases against both companies. Even before the anticipated outcome, Gilead had already offered 13 Indian drug manufactures the licensing rights to manufacture tenofovir, but with the caveat that the Indian manufacturers purchase the active drug ingredient from Gilead and that the product be sold only to the poorest 95 countries (which does not include middle-income countries, such as China and Brazil). The patent rejection potentially opens up the market for generic drug manufactures to further drive down the cost of these two ARVs, and may have wider implications for the future development and distribution of ARVs.