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: 18483

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: Electronic Source

Silverman E
How Brand-Name Drugmakers Fight Generics
Pharmalot 2010 July 22
http://www.pharmalot.com/2010/07/how-brand-name-drugmakers-fight-generics/


Full text:

With all those patent expirations under way, brand-name drugmakers, of course, are desperate to wring as much money as possible out of their products. So how do they counter the generic onslaught? There are several tricks and every company employs multiple strategies, although patent challenges were the most popular choice over the past three years, according to a new survey.
Patent litigation, in fact, was pursued by 60 percent of those queried by Cutting Edge Information, followed closely by defensive pricing, which was popular among 57 percent of the respondents. Half of those surveyed also like to concoct new formulations or a next-generation drug, with new indications clocking in at 45 percent. Only 29 percent pointed to an authorized generic or generics subsidiary.
Over the next three years, however, the most likely strategy to be pursued will be new formulations of existing brand-name meds, with 63 percent choosing this route. New indications garnered 56 percent, and a next-generation drug was close behind at 53 percent. What about patent litigation? That’s down to 51 percent and defensive pricing fell to 49 percent. Meanwhile, switching a drug to over-the-counter status may not be as popular as some thought, falling to 19 percent from 21 percent.
There were 47 execs – brand managers, product managers and business directors, among others – who participated in the survey from companies including Merck, Pfizer, Novartis, Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Gilead Sciences and Roche.

 

  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