Sen. Sherrod Brown of Ohio has been the leading voice in the Senate on the issue of biologics, the expensive drug treatments made from living organisms, and his advocacy for affordable, generic versions of the potentially life-saving drugs will continue once the Senate health care bill hits the floor.
The Senate HELP Committee version of the health care bill included an amendment sponsored by Kay Hagan (D-NC), Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and Mike Enzi (R-WY) which extended the patents on biologics to 12 years, and allowed drugmakers who tweak the formula of the drug slightly to restart the clock on the patent, essentially making it “evergreen.” Sen. Brown proposed a less stringent version, allowing generics to be created after only seven years, and eliminating the evergreen provision. His effort failed in the committee.
But Brown is prepared to keep up the fight. His office confirms that he will be working to round up support for his biologics legislation on the Senate floor. Because the final Senate bill has not yet been released, it’s unclear what the language will contain. But Sen. Brown prefers an approach with a smaller limit to the patent length and without the evergreen language, and he has introduced legislation to that effect in the Senate. Brown’s office tells me he has been working on this legislation for a while, and has the support of the AARP, Consumers Union and other advocacy groups.
“Sen. Brown considers evergreening to be just an endless monopoly period, and it’s not in the interest of consumers,” a spokesman told me. Brown has spoken on the Senate floor about the high cost of these biologics, which could reach $50,000 a year, a cost out of reach of many of the patients who need these drugs. Brown’s office believes their legislation would both lower costs and improve care.
The Federal Trade Commission’s report on follow-on biologic drugs noted that generics would increase competition, provide life-saving drugs at an affordable price, and actually promote innovation in the marketplace, unlike a 12-year exclusivity period, which according to the report would stifle innovation (rejecting a key point made by defenders of the drug lobby-friendly version of the legislation).
Brown’s office has spoken with activists like the AMSA (American Medical Students Assn.) about the bill and supports their efforts. They think that the best way to change minds in the Senate and help get the support necessary for passage is to have people relying on these drugs make a direct appeal. “They should share their stories and their medical bills,” the spokesman said.
This is part of a larger fight between liberal lawmakers and the pharmaceutical lobby, which made a deal with the White House and the Senate Finance Committee to limit their exposure in the health care bill and create huge profit centers like with the exclusivity arrangements on biologics. “In Washington, it seems like we always win the arguments, but Big Pharma wins the votes,” said the spokesman. “We want to win the argument and the vote this time.”



30 Comments



Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Thanks dday
Sign the PublicOptionPlease petition:
If anyone believes this, I’ve got some oceanfront property in Phoenix to sell you:
If Sherrod Brown says so, that’s good enough for me. Like few others in the United States Senate, his approval (or dissent) is about all I need to know about any given issue. Saves time.
Persuading senators to vote against the wishes of Big Pharma will be like trying to convince al-Qaida to embrace the tactic of passive resistance. Thank-you Sherrod Brown for fighting the good fight.
Awesome!
I’m going to post a message on his Facebook wall and congratulate him.
Wanna join me?
http://www.facebook.com/sherrod?v=wall
In view of Rachel Maddow’s reporting that none of the Conservadems will be joining the weasel, it’s possible.
Either way, Reid has all but proven himself to be far too weak as Majority Leader and Lieberman has to go asap. I think that once the bill is voted on in the Senate and goes to conference, Lieberman should unceremoniously be removed from his chairmanship and from the committee entirely. Only then can he be allowed to stay in the Democratic Caucus for the rest of this, his last term in office.
Hear that Miss Connecticut? You thought you’d get some attention running around topless at the pageant and it’s too late to put your top back on.
hehe … maybe Reid gave him that boondoggle of a New London sub warfare base he wanted. What’s a multi-billion dollar bribe between friends?
Why in the world is Liberman saying all those things if he is not going to vote against filibuster?
Maybe……. he is planning on running for President as a Republican? He has already said he will likely support GOP candidates in 2010 and 2012. What a dork.
Done!
Brown certainly is going to have his work cut out for him in the Senate. The Senators just never met a pharma dollar they didn’t like.
He won’t get enough votes to get nominated.
It really does save time. I thanked the staffer I talked to on the phone today for not having to round him up like a balky calf every freaking week, like I do my Blue Dog congressman.
So, essentially, it’s all-eyes-on-Joe. Funny how that’s worked out. Olympia Snowe must be pissed at how badly she played her hand.
“Pay attention to MEEEEEEEEE!~”
Topless is all the rage for Lieberweasels. *g*
Yeah Teddy!
Trying to reach ‘em in new ways.
Joe lives to screw up the Democrats. His hatred after the last election is deep and wide. He will continue to do this for as long as it’s allowed. I think our next project, after we get health care, is to get him removed from his committee chair. It makes me so angry that he gets everything he wants and does nothing with it that’s any good.
Right up there with the repeated extensions of copyrights, to the point where it’s longer than the average lifespan … protecting mostly entertainment stuff from big corporations.
I’d like to suggest that endless protection be available for one (and only one) item per company, at a high price, like 10 percent (or more) of all revenues from it, for as long as it’s protected, but the protection ends when they stop making or using that item, regardless of how long it’s been.
Done!
Profit-driven ‘innovation’ – we need to make legislators like Enzi and Hagen and Hatch, who would…
say out loud that health care IS NOT a human right, over and over. They are going to run afoul of the public mood if we can drive them hard enough.
Pretty tone-deaf, and they seem to want to go there – let’s help them along.
And btw, can I tell you how fun it is for me to read dday here?
Plus, it’s made digby write more. Heh.
watertiger is upstairs!
Late Night: Republicans to Re-Enact Famous Death Scene From “Monty Python and the Holy Grail” on the Floor of the House
win-win-win
I really like Brown. But you know as well as I that his lovely spouse is his Liberal heart.
Dawg bless Connie Schultz.
Please look up the definition of biologics, your description belies a level of scientific ignorance that weakens your arguments as a whole. Then take a look at our understanding of how comparable the “biosimilars,” to which Brown incorrectly applies the term “generics,” are known to be to their pioneer forebears.
I can save you some time on the latter, in that there is no clinical data to support the application of bioequivalency standards (developed for chemically identical active ingredients, true generic drugs) for any biologic produced in mammalian cell lines (i.e., the majority of new biologics). None. The latter cannot currently be manufactured to a similar level of structural similarity as generic drugs, when compared to their respective pioneer therapies. Anyone who tells you otherwise is a liar or is scientifically ignorant.
The linked FTC report actually advocates giving the FDA the authority to establish whether the biosimilars path is the scientifically justifiable one. The arguments being advocated by you, Brown, and a gaggle of medical students (students!) is an economic one, and is not currently scientifically justifiable.
In my opinion, garnered from 23 years of biologic drug development experience, the term “evergreening” is unduly prejudicial as applied here. Our current understanding of biological drug action and clinical safety is too embryonic to allow the uncritical application of patent and copyright precedents developed for toothpaste, ball bearings, and movie soundtracks.
your dedication to informed Democracy is quite admirable. not.
Um, you do not want to do that.
Really.
i’ve got a better idea. since the patent system is a barrier to healthcare causing many unnecessary deaths throughout the world and since the patent system impedes the pace of scientific discovery and innovation — let’s get rid of the patent system for pharmaceuticals. economists have been proposing alternatives (see for example stiglitz, Prizes, Not Patents).
patents in healthcare do not serve the common good. get rid of them.
The history of Aranesp and Procrit are a case study of much of what is wrong with how the US drug business has developed. Medicare spends more on this drug than any other. This article from Forbes is from ’06.
http://www.forbes.com/business/free_forbes/2006/1030/126.html
In the last week, this drug has made the news on two fronts and the stories are important as the drugs and how they are prescribed affects millions of people who have cancer and kidney disease.
Andrew Cuomo and 14 other AG’s filed suit against Amgen and a marketing firm for kickbacks paid to providers who charged Medicaid fraudulently. This suit was joined to a previous suit filed earlier against Amgen.
A very important study was published that indicates Aranesp and related drugs do not improve the patients conditions nearly as much as previously thought and doubles the chances of strokes for pre-dialysis patients. Other studies have all shown increased risks and fewer benefits to justify the risks.
Medicare policy was in conflict with FDA findings. Patients suffered. Lobbyists lobbied. Bad laws were passed. Attention must be paid.
http://www.news-medical.net/news/20091031/Amgen-publishes-Phase-3-study-results-of-Aranesp.aspx
http://www.boston.com/news/health/articles/2009/10/31/researchers_question_anemia_drug_benefits/
Thank you, Sherrod.