Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2011 Sep;89(3):450-502.
doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0009.2011.00636.x.

An empirical review of major legislation affecting drug development: past experiences, effects, and unintended consequences

Affiliations
Review

An empirical review of major legislation affecting drug development: past experiences, effects, and unintended consequences

Aaron S Kesselheim. Milbank Q. 2011 Sep.

Abstract

Context: With the development of transformative drugs at a low point, numerous commentators have recommended new legislation that uses supplementary market exclusivity as an incentive to promote innovation in the pharmaceutical market.

Methods: This report provides an historical perspective on proposals for encouraging drug research. Four legislative programs have been primarily designed to offer market exclusivity to promote public health goals in the pharmaceutical or biomedical sciences: the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980, the Orphan Drug Act of 1983, the Hatch-Waxman Act of 1984, and the pediatric exclusivity provisions of the FDA Modernization Act of 1997. I reviewed quantitative and qualitative studies that reported on the outcomes from these programs and evaluated the quality of evidence generated.

Findings: All four legislative programs generally have been regarded as successful, although such conclusions are largely based on straightforward descriptive reports rather than on more rigorous comparative data or analyses that sufficiently account for confounding. Overall, solid data demonstrate that market exclusivity incentives can attract interest from parties involved in drug development. However, using market exclusivity to promote innovation in the pharmaceutical market can be prone to misuse, leading to improper gains. In addition, important collateral effects have emerged with substantial negative public health implications.

Conclusions: Using market exclusivity to promote pharmaceutical innovation can lead to positive outcomes, but the practice is also characterized by waste and collateral effects. Certain practices, such as mechanisms for reevaluation and closer ties of incentives programs to public health outcomes, can help address these problems.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Arno PS, Bonuck K, Davis M. Rare Diseases, Drug Development, and AIDS: The Impact of the Orphan Drug Act. The Milbank Quarterly. 1995;73(2):231–52. - PubMed
    1. AUTM (Association of University Technology Managers) The AUTM Licensing Survey 2002. Deerfield, IL: 2002.
    1. AUTM (Association of University Technology Managers) FY2008 US Licensing Survey. 2009a. Available at http://www.autm.net (accessed June 16, 2011)
    1. AUTM (Association of University Technology Managers) Statement of Principles and Strategies for the Equitable Dissemination of Medical Technologies. 2009b. Available at http://www.autm.net/Content/NavigationMenu/TechTransfer/GlobalHealth/sta... (accessed June 16, 2011)
    1. Baker-Smith CM, Benjamin DK, Jr., Grabowski HG, Reid ED, Mangum B, Goldsmith JV, Murphy MD, Edwards R, Eisenstein EL, Sun J, Califf RM, Li JS. Economic Returns of Pediatric Clinical Trials of Antihypertensive Drugs. American Heart Journal. 2008;156(4):682–88. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Substances