The Shifting Functional Balance Of Patents And Drug Regulation
- 1 September 2001
- journal article
- Published by Health Affairs (Project Hope) in Health Affairs
- Vol. 20 (5) , 119-135
- https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.20.5.119
Abstract
Patents are often portrayed as the necessary reward to compensate pharmaceutical firms for the huge costs and risks associated with Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-mandated clinical trials of new drugs. But the relationship between the patent system and other regulation of drugs is more complex than this simple formulation suggests. Drug regulation operates in tandem with patents to make proprietary products profitable, and patents themselves increasingly threaten to limit profitability by diverting profits elsewhere. At the same time, resistance to high drug prices is prompting new state and federal regulatory initiatives that threaten to reduce the value of drug patents. The distinctive intertwining of patents with other regulatory regimes and the shifting role of patents in the biopharmaceutical sector call into question how this singular success story for innovation policy will play out in the future.Keywords
This publication has 9 references indexed in Scilit:
- Prescription Drug Prices: Why Do Some Pay More Than Others Do?Health Affairs, 2001
- Health Spending Growth Up In 1999; Faster Growth Expected In The FutureHealth Affairs, 2001
- Clinical pharmacogenomics: applications in pharmaceutical R&DDrug Discovery Today, 2001
- Tracking health care costs: inflation returns.Health Affairs, 2000
- Health care in the upcoming 2000 election.Health Affairs, 2000
- Optimizing the Science of Drug Development: Opportunities for Better Candidate Selection and Accelerated Evaluation in HumansPharmaceutical Research, 2000
- Pharmacogenomics: Translating Functional Genomics into Rational TherapeuticsScience, 1999
- Public Research and Private Development: Patents and Technology Transfer in Government-Sponsored ResearchVirginia Law Review, 1996
- A Manifesto concerning the Legal Protection of Computer ProgramsColumbia Law Review, 1994