IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/aphecp/v17y2019i1d10.1007_s40258-018-0420-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Generic Drug Industry Embraces a Faster, Cheaper Pathway for Challenging Patents

Author

Listed:
  • Jonathan J. Darrow

    (Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Program On Regulation, Therapeutics, And Law (PORTAL), Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine)

  • Reed F. Beall

    (Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Program On Regulation, Therapeutics, And Law (PORTAL), Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine)

  • Aaron S. Kesselheim

    (Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Program On Regulation, Therapeutics, And Law (PORTAL), Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine)

Abstract

Background Most new brand-name drugs are protected by patents from generic competition, but these patents are occasionally granted in error. Invalidating such patents has traditionally been accomplished via court litigation by generic manufacturers, which is expensive and time consuming. In 2011, Congress created an administrative alternative to court litigation of patents, called inter partes review, intended to be much faster and less expensive. Objective To evaluate the use of inter partes review to challenge pharmaceutical patents, including the number of challenges, the number of associated drug products, and the extent to which challengers have been successful. Methods We obtained data pertaining to inter partes review proceedings, including identity of patent challenger, duration of proceedings, and outcome, from September 16, 2012 through April 24, 2017 from UnifiedPatents.com, and combined it with information about drug products and their associated patents, including patent type, contained in the US Food and Drug Administration’s Orange Book. Results Generic drug manufacturers have embraced the new inter partes review process, succeeding in overturning all challenged claims in 43% of the patents they have targeted since 2011, and some challenged claims in an additional 8%. Inter partes review for drug patents has consistently been completed within 12 months, as required by statute. Successful challenges have been brought most frequently against drug patents covering new formulations or methods of use, rather than drug patents covering active ingredients. Conclusion In the pharmaceutical market, the inter partes review process can meaningfully contribute to ensuring that invalid patents do not block timely availability of generic drugs.

Suggested Citation

  • Jonathan J. Darrow & Reed F. Beall & Aaron S. Kesselheim, 2019. "The Generic Drug Industry Embraces a Faster, Cheaper Pathway for Challenging Patents," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 47-54, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:17:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1007_s40258-018-0420-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s40258-018-0420-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40258-018-0420-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40258-018-0420-8?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Powell, K. Skylar & Lim, Eunah, 2022. "All or nothing: International coalitions responding to competing pressures in challenges to IP rights," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 28(3).

    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:spr:aphecp:v:17:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1007_s40258-018-0420-8. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.