Generic Prescript. costs = Name Brand...huh? (Read 1193 times)

    I am glad that we no longer have these pretty looking pens that don't work littered all around the house anymore.  Why was the ink in those pharma pens so bad?

    R2E


    "run" "to" "eat"

      because it is generic.

      i find the sunshine beckons me to open up the gate and dream and dream ~~robbie williams


      Feeling the growl again

        There is plenty of research out there (that I don't have time today to pull) showing that across the board, healthcare providers are influenced by gifts of any sort, whether they be trips to Aruba or cheap pens that break after 2 scripts.  ALL people are influenced.

         

        Not all influence is bad but I would find it hard (very) to argue that gifts fall in a desireable category.  I would say I miss the supply of 200 pens my wife used to bring home from conferences but half of them were not good for 2 of the post-its they came with...lowest-cost vendor I assume.

         

        The truth is even most of the drug reps don't miss them...can you imagine having to keep big piles of that stuff in your house and garage all the time?

        "If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does.  There's your pep talk for today.  Go Run." -- Slo_Hand

         


        Needs more cowbell!

          If the government was going to mandate a change in the formulation, but mandate a generic-type price, who is going to pay a company for developing and validating the new formulation? 

           

          You know, I wouldn't even have a problem paying for that new patented delivery method IF it actually worked...but it doesn't.  So now instead of paying $5 for something that works, I pay 7x as much for something that doesn't work.  Before receiving that patent the company that makes Pro-Air HFA inhalers should have had something that worked at least as well as what it replaced.  I end up going through at least 2x as many of the Pro-Air devices as I did the generic CFC powered ones...so, really, I'm paying at least 14x what I did for the banned generic.

          I shoot pretty things! ~

          '14 Goals:

          • 6 duathlons (1 Olympic distance)

          • 130#s (and stay there, gotdammit!)

          R2E


          "run" "to" "eat"

             Before receiving that patent the company that makes Pro-Air HFA inhalers should have had something that worked at least as well as what it replaced. 

             

            +1

            i find the sunshine beckons me to open up the gate and dream and dream ~~robbie williams

              You know, I wouldn't even have a problem paying for that new patented delivery method IF it actually worked...but it doesn't.  So now instead of paying $5 for something that works, I pay 7x as much for something that doesn't work.  Before receiving that patent the company that makes Pro-Air HFA inhalers should have had something that worked at least as well as what it replaced.  I end up going through at least 2x as many of the Pro-Air devices as I did the generic CFC powered ones...so, really, I'm paying at least 14x what I did for the banned generic.

              You raise a good point.

               

              The way it is now, to obtain a patent the invention had to be "novel" and "unobvious" (yes, educated people came up with that one), over the "prior art." 

               

              By the way, it looks like the company who markets this is Teva Respiratory, LLC.  Teva is primarily generic house.  

              "If you have the fire, run..." -John Climacus


              Feeling the growl again

                You know, I wouldn't even have a problem paying for that new patented delivery method IF it actually worked...but it doesn't.  So now instead of paying $5 for something that works, I pay 7x as much for something that doesn't work.  Before receiving that patent the company that makes Pro-Air HFA inhalers should have had something that worked at least as well as what it replaced.  I end up going through at least 2x as many of the Pro-Air devices as I did the generic CFC powered ones...so, really, I'm paying at least 14x what I did for the banned generic.

                 

                Well, apparently the FDA thinks it works if they approved it.  Whether that means it does or not, or what data has been generated to validate it, it's not my area so I would not know.  But you are right....if it is approved...it should work....there is also the possibility that while it worked in large randomized trials one formulation works for some patients but not others.  So overall it proved efficacy but in different patients.

                 

                Randomized controlled trials are the best way to validate the effectiveness of a drug but sorely inadequete to choose the proper drug for an individual patient.

                "If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does.  There's your pep talk for today.  Go Run." -- Slo_Hand

                 


                Needs more cowbell!

                  By the way, it looks like the company who markets this is Teva Respiratory, LLC.  Teva is primarily generic house.  

                   

                  That is interesting.  I have to wonder how/why they won the patent.  Were there other companies who perhaps lost the patent, but made a more effective product?

                  I shoot pretty things! ~

                  '14 Goals:

                  • 6 duathlons (1 Olympic distance)

                  • 130#s (and stay there, gotdammit!)


                  Feeling the growl again

                    By the way, it looks like the company who markets this is Teva Respiratory, LLC.  Teva is primarily generic house.  

                     

                    Primarily but no longer exclusively.

                     

                    I don't actually know if they hold a patent on this or if they are simply the first generic to reach the market with the new propellant.  If they are just the first with the new propellant, they will drive up the price until additional competitors come on-line to compete it down. 

                    "If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does.  There's your pep talk for today.  Go Run." -- Slo_Hand

                     


                    Feeling the growl again

                      That is interesting.  I have to wonder how/why they won the patent.  Were there other companies who perhaps lost the patent, but made a more effective product?

                       

                      Happens all the time, this is why for certain drugs people will still go with branded even if it is more expensive.  For example there are studies published showing that some generic bupriorion (Welbutrin) does not work because while the active ingredient is the same, the binders in the pills are different and dump the drug rather than release more slowly, resulting in a rapid rise in blood level of the drug but also rapid clearance.  Therefore, the generic does not stay in the system long enough to be effective.

                       

                      Remember, the process to validate a generic applies to the active ingredient but that does not necessarily mean the pills (or product) will work exactly the same in  your body.  There are some things where I would take the generic every time but others I would insist on branded.

                      "If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does.  There's your pep talk for today.  Go Run." -- Slo_Hand

                       


                      Needs more cowbell!

                        I don't actually know if they hold a patent on this or if they are simply the first generic to reach the market with the new propellant.  If they are just the first with the new propellant, they will drive up the price until additional competitors come on-line to compete it down. 

                         

                        They hold a patent...sounds like several patents.  Some have expired, but not all.  Looks like it's possible that something else could be approved generic this Fall...or maybe not for 3 more years. Undecided

                        I shoot pretty things! ~

                        '14 Goals:

                        • 6 duathlons (1 Olympic distance)

                        • 130#s (and stay there, gotdammit!)

                          That is interesting.  I have to wonder how/why they won the patent.  Were there other companies who perhaps lost the patent, but made a more effective product?

                           There you go again, thinking logically.

                           

                          Yes, a company can lose a patent in litigation if it is declared invalid. More commonly, though, a patent "expires."  The term of a patent is 20 years from the date that the patent application was filed.  It takes about 3 years to process an application, so you're talking about a 17-year monopoly. 

                           

                          Think of it like a handshake: The patent office (i.e., the government, i.e., "we") gives the inventor a 17-year monopoly.  In exchange, the inventor describes the invention (in the patent "specification") in such gory detail that, once the patent expires others (i.e., generic houses) can reproduce the invention (here a drug).

                          "If you have the fire, run..." -John Climacus


                          Needs more cowbell!

                            Happens all the time, this is why for certain drugs people will still go with branded even if it is more expensive.  For example there are studies published showing that some generic bupriorion (Welbutrin) does not work because while the active ingredient is the same, the binders in the pills are different and dump the drug rather than release more slowly, resulting in a rapid rise in blood level of the drug but also rapid clearance.  Therefore, the generic does not stay in the system long enough to be effective.

                             

                            Remember, the process to validate a generic applies to the active ingredient but that does not necessarily mean the pills (or product) will work exactly the same in  your body.  There are some things where I would take the generic every time but others I would insist on branded.

                             

                            Yup, I've heard this is the case for a few classes of drugs, at least when it's something like an extended release product.  I can totally understand why a patient would demand a particular brand of a drug, especially if it were something that had an crucial effect on their heart or brain.

                            I shoot pretty things! ~

                            '14 Goals:

                            • 6 duathlons (1 Olympic distance)

                            • 130#s (and stay there, gotdammit!)

                            R2E


                            "run" "to" "eat"

                              Remember, the process to validate a generic applies to the active ingredient but that does not necessarily mean the pills (or product) will work exactly the same in  your body.  There are some things where I would take the generic every time but others I would insist on branded.

                               

                              i wonder about this with zyrtec vs generic.

                              i find the sunshine beckons me to open up the gate and dream and dream ~~robbie williams


                              Needs more cowbell!

                                 There you go again, thinking logically.

                                 

                                Yes, a company can lose a patent in litigation if it is declared invalid. More commonly, though, a patent "expires."  The term of a patent is 20 years from the date that the patent application was filed.  It takes about 3 years to process an application, so you're talking about a 17-year monopoly. 

                                 

                                Think of it like a handshake: The patent office (i.e., the government, i.e., "we") gives the inventor a 17-year monopoly.  In exchange, the inventor describes the invention (in the patent "specification") in such gory detail that, once the patent expires others (i.e., generic houses) can reproduce the invention (here a drug).

                                 

                                This brings up another question...what if it's a drug that was developed overseas?  How does the process work when it's approved in the US?  Does the patent process start all over?  ie, is the drug fully repatented for the US market?  The reason I wonder this, is the primary long-acting asthma med I take (Qvar) was originally a European medication, I believe.  I think it's only recent that it was approved in the US.  Which makes me wonder how long it will be before that will be available in generic.  Something tells me I have a LONG wait.

                                I shoot pretty things! ~

                                '14 Goals:

                                • 6 duathlons (1 Olympic distance)

                                • 130#s (and stay there, gotdammit!)