corner
Healthy Skepticism
Join us to help reduce harm from misleading health information.
Increase font size   Decrease font size   Print-friendly view   Print
Register Log in

Healthy Skepticism Library item: 1517

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

 

Publication type: news

Court Declines Patent Case Over 'Off-Label' Drug Uses
Wall Street Journal 2003 Dec 1


Full text:

The Supreme Court dealt a blow to large drug manufacturers Monday, refusing to hear an appeal over patent rights for drugs that are prescribed for uses regulators haven’t officially approved.

The case involved the lucrative patents granted to a drug’s original developer and competition from rival generic-drug makers. Big companies that develop and sell drugs wanted the court to make it easier to protect patents for drugs that may be used “off-label.”

Once a drug is approved by the Food and Drug Administration, doctors can prescribe it for uses other than its intended purpose. The common practice is based on research or anecdotal evidence from other doctors, and is unrelated to whether the drug is the patented original or a generic knockoff.

In this case, drug maker Allergan Inc. claimed that generic-drug makers exploited the off-label potential of a patented glaucoma drug. A federal appeals court ruled against Allergan, and the company appealed to the Supreme Court.

Makers of generic drugs may seek permission to make copies of FDA-approved medications only for the uses the government has already approved. Allergan claims that Alcon Laboratories and other generic manufacturers asked permission to make the glaucoma drug brimonidine knowing that it would be used extensively in a way not foreseen when the drug was first brought to market.

Brimonidine was originally used to lower pressure in the eyes of glaucoma patients. Later, however, researchers at Allergan discovered that the drug can also be effective in preventing the death of optic nerve cells in glaucoma patients, and doctors now prescribe it for that purpose.

Prescriptions for off-label uses of drugs may account for more than 25% of the approximately 1.6 billion prescriptions written each year, lawyers for Allergan told the court. (Allergan Inc. v. Alcon Laboratories)

 

  Healthy Skepticism on RSS   Healthy Skepticism on Facebook   Healthy Skepticism on Twitter

Please
Click to Register

(read more)

then
Click to Log in
for free access to more features of this website.

Forgot your username or password?

You are invited to
apply for membership
of Healthy Skepticism,
if you support our aims.

Pay a subscription

Support our work with a donation

Buy Healthy Skepticism T Shirts


If there is something you don't like, please tell us. If you like our work, please tell others.

Email a Friend








Far too large a section of the treatment of disease is to-day controlled by the big manufacturing pharmacists, who have enslaved us in a plausible pseudo-science...
The blind faith which some men have in medicines illustrates too often the greatest of all human capacities - the capacity for self deception...
Some one will say, Is this all your science has to tell us? Is this the outcome of decades of good clinical work, of patient study of the disease, of anxious trial in such good faith of so many drugs? Give us back the childlike trust of the fathers in antimony and in the lancet rather than this cold nihilism. Not at all! Let us accept the truth, however unpleasant it may be, and with the death rate staring us in the face, let us not be deceived with vain fancies...
we need a stern, iconoclastic spirit which leads, not to nihilism, but to an active skepticism - not the passive skepticism, born of despair, but the active skepticism born of a knowledge that recognizes its limitations and knows full well that only in this attitude of mind can true progress be made.
- William Osler 1909