Patent Thickets and Product Hops: Challenges and Opportunities for Legislative Reform.

IF 1.6 4区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS
William B Feldman
{"title":"Patent Thickets and Product Hops: Challenges and Opportunities for Legislative Reform.","authors":"William B Feldman","doi":"10.1017/jme.2025.54","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Two key strategies that brand-name pharmaceutical manufacturers employ to limit generic competition are patent thickets and product hops. The former strategy entails obtaining numerous patents on peripheral features of products (not just the active ingredients), and the latter involves shifting active ingredients into reformulations with new patent protection that can extend periods of market exclusivity. These strategies have become particularly problematic for drug-device combinations like inhalers and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, which contain pharmaceutical compounds that are sold together with their delivery devices. The Senate Judiciary Committee moved three bipartisan bills out of committee during the last legislative session aimed at facilitating more timely generic competition. Although these bills offer a valuable step forward, more is needed to limit the sort of patent gamesmanship that has become pervasive in the US pharmaceutical industry. Such reforms should include routine reexamination by the US Patent and Trademark Office of patents submitted for listing with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), a greater role for the FDA in reviewing such listings, limits on the number of patents that brand-name firms can assert when suing for infringement following patent challenges, stronger incentives for patent challenges, and more flexibility for the FDA to approve complex generic drugs.</p>","PeriodicalId":50165,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics","volume":" ","pages":"1-6"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/jme.2025.54","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Two key strategies that brand-name pharmaceutical manufacturers employ to limit generic competition are patent thickets and product hops. The former strategy entails obtaining numerous patents on peripheral features of products (not just the active ingredients), and the latter involves shifting active ingredients into reformulations with new patent protection that can extend periods of market exclusivity. These strategies have become particularly problematic for drug-device combinations like inhalers and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, which contain pharmaceutical compounds that are sold together with their delivery devices. The Senate Judiciary Committee moved three bipartisan bills out of committee during the last legislative session aimed at facilitating more timely generic competition. Although these bills offer a valuable step forward, more is needed to limit the sort of patent gamesmanship that has become pervasive in the US pharmaceutical industry. Such reforms should include routine reexamination by the US Patent and Trademark Office of patents submitted for listing with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), a greater role for the FDA in reviewing such listings, limits on the number of patents that brand-name firms can assert when suing for infringement following patent challenges, stronger incentives for patent challenges, and more flexibility for the FDA to approve complex generic drugs.

专利丛林与产品啤酒花:立法改革的挑战与机遇。
品牌制药商用来限制仿制药竞争的两个关键策略是专利丛和产品啤酒花。前一种策略需要获得产品外围特征(不仅仅是活性成分)的大量专利,后一种策略涉及将活性成分转变为具有新专利保护的重新配方,可以延长市场独占期。对于吸入器和胰高血糖素样肽-1受体激动剂等药物装置组合来说,这些策略尤其成问题,这些药物装置含有与它们的给药装置一起出售的药物化合物。参议院司法委员会在上一届立法会议期间提出了三项两党法案,旨在促进更及时的通用竞争。尽管这些法案向前迈出了有价值的一步,但还需要采取更多措施来限制在美国制药行业普遍存在的那种专利把戏。这些改革应包括美国专利商标局对提交给美国食品和药物管理局(FDA)的专利进行例行复审,FDA在审查此类上市时发挥更大的作用,限制品牌公司在专利挑战后起诉侵权时可以主张的专利数量,加强对专利挑战的激励,以及让FDA在批准复杂的仿制药方面更具灵活性。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics
Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics 医学-医学:法
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
4.80%
发文量
70
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Material published in The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics (JLME) contributes to the educational mission of The American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics, covering public health, health disparities, patient safety and quality of care, and biomedical science and research. It provides articles on such timely topics as health care quality and access, managed care, pain relief, genetics, child/maternal health, reproductive health, informed consent, assisted dying, ethics committees, HIV/AIDS, and public health. Symposium issues review significant policy developments, health law court decisions, and books.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信