蒲公英 - 制药技术的传播者 GMP理论的实践者

搜索
查看: 2541|回复: 13
收起左侧

【杯具】biosimilars就这样昙花一现?

[复制链接]
药生
发表于 2014-8-20 09:47:07 | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式

欢迎您注册蒲公英

您需要 登录 才可以下载或查看,没有帐号?立即注册

x
中国,生物类似物,如火如荼
尤其是神马单抗、干扰素、酶类……
可是小妖今天看到新闻却是这样的,人家大公司都准备不玩了……

新闻稿如下:
Big investors urge drugmakers to stop badmouthing biosimilars

August 19, 2014 | By Arlene Weintraub
As the FDA considers whether it should approve recently filed biosimilar versions of Johnson & Johnson's ($JNJ) Remicade and Amgen's ($AMGN) Neupogen, a parade of pharma companies, physicians and payers is coming forward to voice their concerns, not the least of which is how these products will be named. Now another group of concerned parties has joined the chorus: investors.
A group of 19 institutional investors wrote to the boards of several major pharma and biotech companies, asking them to agree to various business principles that would support the use of biosimilars, according to The Wall Street Journal blog Pharmalot. If life sciences stakeholders continue to bicker over biosim drugs, the investors say, they will undermine shareholder value and limit any potential savings the healthcare system can generate by embracing them.
"We're asking the boards for rules of engagement in the policy arena because we're concerned these activities are not aligned with investor interests," Meredith Miller, chief governance officer at the UAW Retiree Medical Benefits Trust, told the WSJ. Miller's group spearheaded the effort to assemble the group of concerned pharma investors, which includes the Illinois State Board of Investment, the AFL-CIO Office of Investment and the New York Common Retirement Fund. The investors manage about $430 billion in combined assets, according to the WSJ.
One of the concerns the investors cite is that some pharma companies have been badmouthing the safety of biosimilars, even though they already have a well-established track record in Europe. "Companies seeking to downplay the patient safety record of European biosimilars have also challenged the capacity of the FDA to promulgate rules and determine when biosimilars may be substituted for biologics," the letter says.
In other words, if biopharma execs don't have something nice to say about biosimilars, they should just shut up.
The investors are also worried about the naming debate. Late last week, several medical associations and individual physicians signed a letter to FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg stating that biosimilars should have unique names--a position the pharma companies support.
But the UAW and its co-signers disagree, stating in their letter that it would be a mistake to give biosimilars different names from the products they emulate. "In our view, assigning different names communicates to providers that the biosimilar is less effective, causing providers not to prescribe it and ultimately making it difficult for pharmacists to dispense," they say. Pharmacy benefits managers have also voiced support for uniform naming policies.
In concluding their letter, the investors asked specifically for pharma companies to agree that all educational materials about biosimilars will be fair and accurate and all lobbying expenses related to them will be disclosed. They are also requesting more transparency in business deals that may resemble the infamous "pay-for-delay" partnerships that have been formed between pharmaceutical companies and makers of small-molecule generic drugs. In March, the Federal Trade Commission got so fed up with such partnerships that its director, Deborah Feinstein, vowed to collect at least one billion-dollar settlement in a pharma antitrust case this year.
The letter points out that the rules laid out in the Hatch-Waxman Act for disclosing pay-for-delay deals to the FTC don't apply to biosimilars. "Investors fear that without full disclosure of the value, terms and duration of these arrangements, investors and analysts will not be able to evaluate the risks associated with the transactions," it states.
Only Amgen and Novartis ($NVS) have agreed to sign the proposed business principles, while Roche's ($RHHBY) Genentech has declined to participate, according to the WSJ blog. The UAW's Miller says they're still waiting to hear from the other pharma and biotech companies that received the request. "We will be watching the companies and hold them accountable," she says.

回复

使用道具 举报

大师
发表于 2014-8-20 09:48:40 | 显示全部楼层
悬崖勒马?
回复

使用道具 举报

药生
 楼主| 发表于 2014-8-20 09:51:18 | 显示全部楼层
幻影 发表于 2014-8-20 09:48
悬崖勒马?

好像我理解错了……他们是开始要做了?
回复

使用道具 举报

药士
发表于 2014-8-20 09:59:58 | 显示全部楼层
回复

使用道具 举报

大师
发表于 2014-8-20 10:01:04 | 显示全部楼层
仲夏秋夜云 发表于 2014-8-20 09:51
好像我理解错了……他们是开始要做了?

,什么都是你说的。
回复

使用道具 举报

大师
发表于 2014-8-20 10:01:14 | 显示全部楼层
仲夏秋夜云 发表于 2014-8-20 09:51
好像我理解错了……他们是开始要做了?

,什么都是你说的。
回复

使用道具 举报

药生
 楼主| 发表于 2014-8-20 10:05:33 | 显示全部楼层
幻影 发表于 2014-8-20 10:01
,什么都是你说的。

你们可以帮我翻译原文嘛
回复

使用道具 举报

药徒
发表于 2014-8-20 10:05:53 | 显示全部楼层
只有安进公司和诺华公司( NVS $ )已同意签署拟议的经营原则,而罗氏公司( $ RHHBY ) Genentech公司已经拒绝参加,根据华尔街日报的博客。全美汽车工人联合会的米勒说,他们仍然在等待从接收请求其他制药和生物技术公司的来信。 “我们将密切关注该公司并追究其责任, ”她说。
回复

使用道具 举报

药生
 楼主| 发表于 2014-8-20 10:07:24 | 显示全部楼层
fangyuan5 发表于 2014-8-20 10:05
只有安进公司和诺华公司( NVS $ )已同意签署拟议的经营原则,而罗氏公司( $ RHHBY ) Genentech公司已经 ...

谢谢……
回复

使用道具 举报

大师
发表于 2014-8-20 10:09:17 | 显示全部楼层
仲夏秋夜云 发表于 2014-8-20 10:05
你们可以帮我翻译原文嘛

懒得看。。。。
回复

使用道具 举报

药徒
发表于 2014-8-20 10:09:19 | 显示全部楼层
仲夏秋夜云 发表于 2014-8-20 10:07
谢谢……

E问太差,不过翻译软件还不错。
回复

使用道具 举报

药士
发表于 2014-8-20 10:12:44 | 显示全部楼层
fangyuan5 发表于 2014-8-20 10:09
E问太差,不过翻译软件还不错。

没提投资人?
回复

使用道具 举报

药徒
发表于 2014-8-20 10:15:16 | 显示全部楼层
yuansoul 发表于 2014-8-20 10:12
没提投资人?

反正我的理解是有人退出,有人还是感兴趣,应该是会继续,然后有人是持反对意见,认为这个不行。
回复

使用道具 举报

药士
发表于 2014-8-20 10:18:42 | 显示全部楼层
fangyuan5 发表于 2014-8-20 10:15
反正我的理解是有人退出,有人还是感兴趣,应该是会继续,然后有人是持反对意见,认为这个不行。

这个接近了。
回复

使用道具 举报

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

本版积分规则

×发帖声明
1、本站为技术交流论坛,发帖的内容具有互动属性。您在本站发布的内容:
①在无人回复的情况下,可以通过自助删帖功能随时删除(自助删帖功能关闭期间,可以联系管理员微信:8542508 处理。)
②在有人回复和讨论的情况下,主题帖和回复内容已构成一个不可分割的整体,您将不能直接删除该帖。
2、禁止发布任何涉政、涉黄赌毒及其他违反国家相关法律、法规、及本站版规的内容,详情请参阅《蒲公英论坛总版规》。
3、您在本站发表、转载的任何作品仅代表您个人观点,不代表本站观点。不要盗用有版权要求的作品,转贴请注明来源,否则文责自负。
4、请认真阅读上述条款,您发帖即代表接受上述条款。

QQ|手机版|蒲公英|ouryao|蒲公英 ( 京ICP备14042168号-1 )  增值电信业务经营许可证编号:京B2-20243455  互联网药品信息服务资格证书编号:(京)-非经营性-2024-0033

GMT+8, 2025-4-6 13:54

Powered by Discuz! X3.4运维单位:苏州豚鼠科技有限公司

Copyright © 2001-2020, Tencent Cloud.

声明:蒲公英网站所涉及的原创文章、文字内容、视频图片及首发资料,版权归作者及蒲公英网站所有,转载要在显著位置标明来源“蒲公英”;禁止任何形式的商业用途。违反上述声明的,本站及作者将追究法律责任。
快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表