Biopharma, US FTC Portray Opposing Sides In Debate Over Patent ‘March-In’ Policy
BIO and PhRMA describe the complexity of pricing biopharmaceuticals in arguing price should not be a factor in deciding whether to exercise march-in rights. The FTC suggests agencies consider a patent holder’s private investment and breadth of patent coverage, while KEI, AUTM, the American Bar Association, and former USPTO directors also weigh in on NIST's proposed framework.
You may also be interested in...
Contracting practices and lack of competition among large healthcare group purchasing organizations and drug wholesalers – and their impact on the generic pharmaceutical market – are among topics in request for public comments by the agency.
Biden administration’s new framework will consider whether a product’s price is reasonable in deciding whether to exercise march-in rights. Numerous other factors could limit provision’s impact, but industry is concerned it will discourage firms from licensing government-funded inventions.
Faced with a lawsuit asserting it had acquired an asset because it was a potential threat, Sanofi bows out of agreement to develop Maze’s GYS1 inhibitor. A test for FTC’s competition theory will be whether MZE001 eventually makes it to the market through other means.