IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pmed00/1004540.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Predicting patent challenges for small-molecule drugs: A cross-sectional study

Author

Listed:
  • Ally Memedovich
  • Brian Steele
  • Taylor Orr
  • Shanzeh Chaudhry
  • Mina Tadrous
  • Aaron S Kesselheim
  • Aidan Hollis
  • Reed F Beall

Abstract

Background: The high cost of prescription drugs in the United States is maintained by brand-name manufacturers’ competition-free period made possible in part through patent protection, which generic competitors must challenge to enter the market early. Understanding the predictors of these challenges can inform policy development to encourage timely generic competition. Identifying categories of drugs systematically overlooked by challengers, such as those with low market size, highlights gaps where unchecked patent quality and high prices persist, and can help design policy interventions to help promote timely patient access to generic drugs including enhanced patent scrutiny or incentives for challenges. Our objective was to characterize and assess the extent to which market size and other drug characteristics can predict patent challenges for brand-name drugs. Methods and findings: This cross-sectional study included new patented small-molecule drugs approved by the FDA from 2007 to 2018. Market size, patent, and patent challenge data came from IQVIA MIDAS pharmaceutical quarterly sales data, the FDA’s Orange Book database, and the FDA’s Paragraph IV list. Predictive models were constructed using random forest and elastic net classification. The primary outcome was the occurrence of a patent challenge within the first year of eligibility. Of the 210 new small-molecule drugs included in the sample, 55% experienced initiation of patent challenge within the first year of eligibility. Market value was the most important predictor variable, with larger markets being more likely to be associated with patent challenges. Drugs in the anti-infective therapeutic class or those with fast-track approval were less likely to be challenged. The limitations of this work arise from the exclusion of variables that were not readily available publicly, will be the target of future research, or were deemed beyond the scope of this project. Conclusions: Generic competition does not occur with the same timeliness across all drug markets, which can leave granted patents of questionable merit in place and sustain high brand-name drug prices. Predictive models may help direct limited resources for post-grant patent validity review and adjust policy when generic competition is lacking. Ally Memedovich and colleagues report on patent challenges within the first year of eligibility among small-molecule drugs approved by the FDA from 2007-2018 and investigate the extent to which market size and other drug characteristics predict such challenges.Why was this study done?: What did the researchers do and find?: What do these findings mean?:

Suggested Citation

  • Ally Memedovich & Brian Steele & Taylor Orr & Shanzeh Chaudhry & Mina Tadrous & Aaron S Kesselheim & Aidan Hollis & Reed F Beall, 2025. "Predicting patent challenges for small-molecule drugs: A cross-sectional study," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 22(2), pages 1-15, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1004540
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1004540
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1004540
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1004540&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pmed.1004540?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lee Branstetter & Chirantan Chatterjee & Matthew J. Higgins, 2016. "Regulation and welfare: evidence from paragraph IV generic entry in the pharmaceutical industry," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 47(4), pages 857-890, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lurkin, Virginie & Garrow, Laurie A. & Higgins, Matthew J. & Newman, Jeffrey P. & Schyns, Michael, 2017. "Accounting for price endogeneity in airline itinerary choice models: An application to Continental U.S. markets," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 228-246.
    2. Branstetter, Lee & Chatterjee, Chirantan & Higgins, Matthew J., 2022. "Generic competition and the incentives for early-stage pharmaceutical innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    3. Tomaso Duso & Annika Herr & Moritz Suppliet, 2014. "The Welfare Impact Of Parallel Imports: A Structural Approach Applied To The German Market For Oral Anti‐Diabetics," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(9), pages 1036-1057, September.
    4. Castanheira, Micael & Ornaghi, Carmine & Siotis, Georges, 2019. "The unexpected consequences of generic entry," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    5. Chatterjee, Chirantan & Kubo, Kensuke & Pingali, Viswanath, 2015. "The consumer welfare implications of governmental policies and firm strategy in markets for medicines," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 255-273.
    6. Newham, M. & Seldeslachts, J. & Banal-Estanol, A., 2018. "Common Ownership and Market Entry: Evidence from the Pharmaceutical Industry," Working Papers 18/03, Department of Economics, City St George's, University of London.
    7. Sacks, Daniel W., 2018. "Why do HMOs spend less? Patient selection, physician price sensitivity, and prices," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 146-161.
    8. Chatterjee, Chirantan & Gupta, Samarth, 2024. "Public entry and private prices: New evidence from Indian pharmaceutical markets," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 219(C), pages 473-489.
    9. Atal, Juan Pablo & Cuesta, José Ignacio & Sæthre, Morten, 2018. "Quality Regulation and Competition: Evidence from Pharmaceutical Markets," Discussion Paper Series in Economics 20/2018, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Economics.
    10. Angelo Corallo & Maria Elena Latino & Biagio Nuzzo & Fabrizio Striani, 2025. "Advertising increases demand for the equivalent drugs: a theoretical model," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 5(5), pages 1-19, May.
    11. Eric Helland & Seth A. Seabury, 2016. "Are Settlements in Patent Litigation Collusive? Evidence from Paragraph IV Challenges," NBER Working Papers 22194, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Lo, Andrew W. & Thakor, Richard T., 2023. "Financial intermediation and the funding of biomedical innovation: A review," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    13. Durvasula, Maya & Hemphill, C. Scott & Ouellette, Lisa Larrimore & Sampat, Bhaven & Williams, Heidi L., 2023. "The NBER Orange Book Dataset: A user’s guide," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(7).
    14. Farasat A. S. Bokhari & Gary M. Fournier, 2013. "Entry in the ADHD drugs market: Welfare impact of generics and me-too's," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(2), pages 339-392, June.
    15. Bokhari, Farasat A.S. & Mariuzzo, Franco, 2018. "Demand estimation and merger simulations for drugs: Logits v. AIDS," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 653-685.
    16. Fabian Gaessler & Stefan Wagner, 2022. "Patents, Data Exclusivity, and the Development of New Drugs," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 104(3), pages 571-586, May.
    17. Rasmus Arler Bogetoft & Peter Bogetoft, 2022. "Market entrance, patents, and preliminary injunctions: a model of pharmaceutical patent litigation," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 53(3), pages 379-423, June.
    18. Kyle, Margaret K., 2022. "Incentives for pharmaceutical innovation: What’s working, what’s lacking," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    19. Bradley T. Shapiro, 2016. "Estimating the cost of strategic entry delay in pharmaceuticals: The case of Ambien CR," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 201-231, September.
    20. Susan J. Méndez, 2018. "Parallel trade of pharmaceuticals: The Danish market for statins," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(2), pages 333-356, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1004540. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosmedicine (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.