|Page 2 of 2 <|
Petitions to FDA Sometimes Delay Generic Drugs
Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), which represents brand-name drugmakers, supports the citizen petition process and says the dozens of similar petitions pending with the FDA raise legitimate concerns.
"Most citizen petitions raise important regulatory, legal or scientific issues," said Caroline Loew, the group's senior vice president. "The fact is, the petitions have played a vital role at the FDA since their adoption almost 30 years ago. They have been responsible for important discussions about health and safety, and have been a catalyst for key agency decisions, such as speeding approval of AIDS medicines and implementing rules to protect children from accidental iron poisoning."
Although citizen petitions have raised many important drug policy issues, the Wellbutrin filing is one of several dozen pending that some call "blocking petitions" because they have the effect of delaying approval of a generic alternative. FDA officials said that about 170 citizen petitions are before the agency -- compared with 90 in 1999 -- and that about 30 percent involve industry challenges to generic applications.
FDA Chief Counsel Sheldon Bradshaw told generic drugmakers at a September conference that the agency has been troubled by the number of such petitions. He said they "appear designed not to raise timely concerns with respect to the legality or scientific soundness of approving a drug application, but rather to delay approval by compelling the agency" to review arguments that could have been made months before.
That response caused PhRMA to write to Bradshaw asking for more information. Scott Lassman, PhRMA's assistant general counsel, said the organization found the comments to be "troubling," especially if they could lead to restrictions on how and when citizen petitions could be filed.
More recently, Scott Gottlieb, FDA deputy commissioner for medical and scientific affairs, said in an interview that the agency has instituted internal changes that will allow for quicker rulings on citizen petitions, especially if they are filed close to the time when a decision on a new generic is expected. But he said that he did not believe there had been an increase in "what a reasonable person would call a blocking petition."
"It's very hard to decide what's a blocking petition and what has value without taking a serious look," Gottlieb said. "I think citizen petitions are very important and have to be preserved. The last thing we want to do is close off an avenue of discourse with the agency."
By regulation, all generic drugs must be "bioequivalent" to the brand-name drugs they copy and must have the same effects and dependability. Industry-sponsored citizen petitions often challenge the process by which bioequivalence was tested.
Because generics generally cost 25 percent to 75 percent less than brand-name products, the sums of money at stake can be enormous -- for the brand-name company, the generic maker, patients, insurance companies and government programs. Wellbutrin XL (a once-a-day formula of bupropion hydrochloride with fewer side effects than the original) costs $1 to $5 a pill and earns about $800 million a year for Biovail and GlaxoSmithKline PLC, which developed the drug. An Impax spokesman said his company planned to sell its generic version, if approved by the FDA, for "a considerable discount."
Making changes to the citizen petition process is a high priority for the Generic Pharmaceutical Association. Its president, Kathleen Jaeger, said her group considers blocking petitions to be among the greatest obstacles facing the industry.
"Because of the way the system works now, branded companies have every reason to file citizen petitions," she said. "There's a potentially great benefit, and there's no risk. I can't imagine that this is how the originators of the petitions thought they should work."
This is not the first time that the generic industry has complained about citizen petitions that it believed were unfairly blocking generic applications. The Clinton administration responded to those complaints in 1999 with a proposal that would have changed the way the FDA received and handled citizen petitions. PhRMA strongly opposed the rule, and the Bush administration withdrew it in 2003.
Jaeger said the generic industry was working hard with Congress at that time to close other loopholes in the patent system that allowed makers of brand-name drugs to extend their time for exclusive sales. "We were working so hard to get that legislation passed that we didn't really focus on what was happening with the citizen petition rule," she said, "so some of what we won in Congress, we lost to the citizen petitions."
Stabenow and Lott, who are trying, in their bill, to reduce the petitions, said in their letter to von Eschenbach that "the Senate Appropriations Committee recognized the unintended effect citizen petitions were having on the approval of [generic drug applications] and directed the FDA to provide a written report explaining the process and suggesting improvements. . . . It is our understanding the FDA has not moved forward with this request."