User login
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has released a list of companies that “may be pursuing gaming tactics to delay generic competition.”
FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, MD, said the agency is taking steps to improve access to drugs and make them more affordable.
One of these steps is trying to prevent companies that market brand-name drugs from delaying the release of generic equivalents.
Dr Gottlieb explained that brand companies may create obstacles for generic developers to purchase samples of a brand-name drug.
“In general, generic drug developers need the samples of the brand drug to develop their generic product and/or to conduct testing to show that their product is bioequivalent to the brand drug for FDA approval,” he said.
“Without these samples, generic drug makers may not be able to develop generic alternatives. Yet the FDA has heard that some brand companies will adopt tactics to make it hard for the generic companies to purchase these brand drugs at a fair value and in the open marketplace.”
One such tactic is for brand companies to place restrictions in their commercial contracts or agreements with prescription drug distributors, wholesalers, or specialty pharmacies that limit their ability to sell samples to generic drug developers.
In other cases, brand companies may be preventing generic drug developers from accessing samples due to limited distribution programs required by a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) with Elements to Assure Safe Use (ETASU).
“But I want to be very clear: a path to securing samples of brand drugs for the purpose of generic drug development should always be available,” Dr Gottlieb said. “Even in the case of limited distribution programs, such as those required by certain REMS, there should be a path forward for generic drug development.”
With this in mind, the FDA has released a list of brand companies that may have prevented generic drug developers from accessing samples. The list contains 52 brand-name drugs, including Pomalyst, Promacta, Revlimid, Tasigna, and Thalidomid.
Generic drug developers have reported trouble obtaining samples of these drugs and asked the FDA for assistance.
When the FDA receives such a request, the agency first determines whether the product in question has a REMS program with ETASU that may impact distribution.
If the FDA confirms the existence of such a program, the generic company can submit its bioequivalence testing protocol to the FDA. The agency then evaluates this protocol to ensure the plan for testing the product contains safety protections comparable to the brand product’s REMS program.
If a generic developer’s plans include appropriate protections, the developer can request that the FDA send a Safety Determination Letter to the brand company. This letter notes that the REMS program doesn’t prevent the brand company from selling its product to generic drug developers.
The FDA has issued 21 Safety Determination Letters to date, according to Dr Gottlieb.
If a generic drug developer has trouble obtaining samples of a drug for which there is no REMS program with ETASU, the FDA informs the developer that there are no FDA-required restrictions that would prevent it from obtaining samples.
The FDA also notifies the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) of requests from generic drug developers seeking assistance in obtaining samples from brand companies. And the FDA encourages generic drug developers to raise these cases with the FTC if they believe that anticompetitive conduct has taken place.
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has released a list of companies that “may be pursuing gaming tactics to delay generic competition.”
FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, MD, said the agency is taking steps to improve access to drugs and make them more affordable.
One of these steps is trying to prevent companies that market brand-name drugs from delaying the release of generic equivalents.
Dr Gottlieb explained that brand companies may create obstacles for generic developers to purchase samples of a brand-name drug.
“In general, generic drug developers need the samples of the brand drug to develop their generic product and/or to conduct testing to show that their product is bioequivalent to the brand drug for FDA approval,” he said.
“Without these samples, generic drug makers may not be able to develop generic alternatives. Yet the FDA has heard that some brand companies will adopt tactics to make it hard for the generic companies to purchase these brand drugs at a fair value and in the open marketplace.”
One such tactic is for brand companies to place restrictions in their commercial contracts or agreements with prescription drug distributors, wholesalers, or specialty pharmacies that limit their ability to sell samples to generic drug developers.
In other cases, brand companies may be preventing generic drug developers from accessing samples due to limited distribution programs required by a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) with Elements to Assure Safe Use (ETASU).
“But I want to be very clear: a path to securing samples of brand drugs for the purpose of generic drug development should always be available,” Dr Gottlieb said. “Even in the case of limited distribution programs, such as those required by certain REMS, there should be a path forward for generic drug development.”
With this in mind, the FDA has released a list of brand companies that may have prevented generic drug developers from accessing samples. The list contains 52 brand-name drugs, including Pomalyst, Promacta, Revlimid, Tasigna, and Thalidomid.
Generic drug developers have reported trouble obtaining samples of these drugs and asked the FDA for assistance.
When the FDA receives such a request, the agency first determines whether the product in question has a REMS program with ETASU that may impact distribution.
If the FDA confirms the existence of such a program, the generic company can submit its bioequivalence testing protocol to the FDA. The agency then evaluates this protocol to ensure the plan for testing the product contains safety protections comparable to the brand product’s REMS program.
If a generic developer’s plans include appropriate protections, the developer can request that the FDA send a Safety Determination Letter to the brand company. This letter notes that the REMS program doesn’t prevent the brand company from selling its product to generic drug developers.
The FDA has issued 21 Safety Determination Letters to date, according to Dr Gottlieb.
If a generic drug developer has trouble obtaining samples of a drug for which there is no REMS program with ETASU, the FDA informs the developer that there are no FDA-required restrictions that would prevent it from obtaining samples.
The FDA also notifies the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) of requests from generic drug developers seeking assistance in obtaining samples from brand companies. And the FDA encourages generic drug developers to raise these cases with the FTC if they believe that anticompetitive conduct has taken place.
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has released a list of companies that “may be pursuing gaming tactics to delay generic competition.”
FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, MD, said the agency is taking steps to improve access to drugs and make them more affordable.
One of these steps is trying to prevent companies that market brand-name drugs from delaying the release of generic equivalents.
Dr Gottlieb explained that brand companies may create obstacles for generic developers to purchase samples of a brand-name drug.
“In general, generic drug developers need the samples of the brand drug to develop their generic product and/or to conduct testing to show that their product is bioequivalent to the brand drug for FDA approval,” he said.
“Without these samples, generic drug makers may not be able to develop generic alternatives. Yet the FDA has heard that some brand companies will adopt tactics to make it hard for the generic companies to purchase these brand drugs at a fair value and in the open marketplace.”
One such tactic is for brand companies to place restrictions in their commercial contracts or agreements with prescription drug distributors, wholesalers, or specialty pharmacies that limit their ability to sell samples to generic drug developers.
In other cases, brand companies may be preventing generic drug developers from accessing samples due to limited distribution programs required by a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) with Elements to Assure Safe Use (ETASU).
“But I want to be very clear: a path to securing samples of brand drugs for the purpose of generic drug development should always be available,” Dr Gottlieb said. “Even in the case of limited distribution programs, such as those required by certain REMS, there should be a path forward for generic drug development.”
With this in mind, the FDA has released a list of brand companies that may have prevented generic drug developers from accessing samples. The list contains 52 brand-name drugs, including Pomalyst, Promacta, Revlimid, Tasigna, and Thalidomid.
Generic drug developers have reported trouble obtaining samples of these drugs and asked the FDA for assistance.
When the FDA receives such a request, the agency first determines whether the product in question has a REMS program with ETASU that may impact distribution.
If the FDA confirms the existence of such a program, the generic company can submit its bioequivalence testing protocol to the FDA. The agency then evaluates this protocol to ensure the plan for testing the product contains safety protections comparable to the brand product’s REMS program.
If a generic developer’s plans include appropriate protections, the developer can request that the FDA send a Safety Determination Letter to the brand company. This letter notes that the REMS program doesn’t prevent the brand company from selling its product to generic drug developers.
The FDA has issued 21 Safety Determination Letters to date, according to Dr Gottlieb.
If a generic drug developer has trouble obtaining samples of a drug for which there is no REMS program with ETASU, the FDA informs the developer that there are no FDA-required restrictions that would prevent it from obtaining samples.
The FDA also notifies the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) of requests from generic drug developers seeking assistance in obtaining samples from brand companies. And the FDA encourages generic drug developers to raise these cases with the FTC if they believe that anticompetitive conduct has taken place.