What is the price of patient convenience or the cost of providing incentives for its delay? In this issue, Rome et al1 report on the $4.3 billion to $6.5 billion of excess drug spending by patients, Medicare, Medicaid, and private insurers because the manufacturer of glatiramer acetate, a disease-modifying drug for multiple sclerosis that patients must take indefinitely, waited until 1 year before the expiration of the patent of their original product to reformulate it, effectively delaying full generic competition. In 2014, Teva Pharmaceuticals obtained a new patent for a double-strength, 3-times-weekly injection of glatiramer acetate (Copaxone), 40 mg, to replace daily glatiramer, 20 mg. This new formulation, which has the advantage of fewer injection reactions and greater patient convenience compared with the daily version, was first registered in a clinical trial in 2005 but was released 10 years later. There were aggressive advertisements for this new formulation, reduced rebates for the old brand name product, and a price point similar to that of the generic daily version that could enter the market when the patent expired for Copaxone in 2015. The combination of these factors allowed Teva to increase its earnings for another 2.5 years by delaying market competition that could have driven down the prices of both generic and brand name glatiramer.
Identify all potential conflicts of interest that might be relevant to your comment.
Conflicts of interest comprise financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including but not limited to employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speaker's bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.
Err on the side of full disclosure.
If you have no conflicts of interest, check "No potential conflicts of interest" in the box below. The information will be posted with your response.
Not all submitted comments are published. Please see our commenting policy for details.
Claytor JD, Redberg RF. Product Hopping—An Expensive and Wasteful Practice. JAMA Intern Med. Published online July 20, 2020. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2020.2736
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: