This is what happens when the US makes it very difficult for generic drugs to exist on the market and when it bans importation of generic drugs from other countries - even from more heavily regulated countries such as Canada.
There are many drugs like this. This is definitely not news. Examples of drugs that came out way later than their similar genetic counterpart:
Namzaric: combination of memantine and donepezil, both of which have been generic for a while.
Combinations of hydrocodone and acetaminophen in varying strengths: 5/325, 5/300, 7.5/300, 7.5/325, etc.
Fexmid and Amrix, which are both cyclobenzaprine in different doses and releases.
Moxatag, which is just extended release amoxicillin.
There is one drug that's a capsule form of a drug that was previously a tablet. (Asacol if I recall.) when you open the capsule, the same exact tablet is inside.
Naprelan, or extended release naproxen.
That's just off the top of my head. All a company has to do is extend the release, adjust the dose slightly, add an indication (also treats fibromyalgia!!) or combine two drugs together and bam, it's technically a new drug.
Other less questionable tactics yet of dubious clinical benefit include: isolating a certain enantiomer or creating a "me too" drug - another drug for the same physiologic target - there are so many ACE inhibitors on the market, for example.
As pharmacists, when we see such antics, we roll our eyes and say "are you kidding me."
Most pharmaceutical companies are just marketing companies. Every time I see a doctor prescribe one of these 'new' drugs I suspect there's some kickback involved.
Yes, it would have similar results. It seems that some of these combo drugs have shorter patents (and will have a generic equivalent sooner), so in the first 3 years it would still be cheaper to complain to the prescriber about cost and have them prescribed separately. There are slight differences in the release, for example, in the Namzaric example I gave, both ingredients are extended release (as opposed to immediate).
I know 'kickbacks' are in theory illegal but there is some kind of soft money / incentives happening. Pharmaceutical sales reps and medical science liaisons keep track of what their doctors prescribe.
6 comments
[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 24.6 ms ] threadhttp://khn.org/news/government-protected-monopolies-drive-dr...
http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2017/06/robin_feldman_o.htm...
Namzaric: combination of memantine and donepezil, both of which have been generic for a while.
Combinations of hydrocodone and acetaminophen in varying strengths: 5/325, 5/300, 7.5/300, 7.5/325, etc.
Fexmid and Amrix, which are both cyclobenzaprine in different doses and releases.
Moxatag, which is just extended release amoxicillin.
There is one drug that's a capsule form of a drug that was previously a tablet. (Asacol if I recall.) when you open the capsule, the same exact tablet is inside.
Naprelan, or extended release naproxen.
That's just off the top of my head. All a company has to do is extend the release, adjust the dose slightly, add an indication (also treats fibromyalgia!!) or combine two drugs together and bam, it's technically a new drug.
Other less questionable tactics yet of dubious clinical benefit include: isolating a certain enantiomer or creating a "me too" drug - another drug for the same physiologic target - there are so many ACE inhibitors on the market, for example.
As pharmacists, when we see such antics, we roll our eyes and say "are you kidding me."
Most pharmaceutical companies are just marketing companies. Every time I see a doctor prescribe one of these 'new' drugs I suspect there's some kickback involved.
In such cases, will you recommend the patient to buy the two separate drugs instead of the expensive combined drug?
I know 'kickbacks' are in theory illegal but there is some kind of soft money / incentives happening. Pharmaceutical sales reps and medical science liaisons keep track of what their doctors prescribe.