So, please call our Senator and ask him to support some bill that has no name or number, but has something to do with 'biotech.' Please.
WASHINGTON -- The biotech industry is moving closer to a victory in Congress that would protect lucrative drugs from generic-drug competition for a lengthy period, though the issue continues to rile up lawmakers and consumer advocates.
The Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee will be looking at a bill this week that would grant so-called biologic drugs -- those engineered from living cells -- made by companies like Amgen Inc. a total of 13½ years of intellectual-property protection, which is about twice the length of time proposed by the White House.
The proposal, introduced by the committee's chairman, Sen. Edward Kennedy (D.,Mass.), would be part of an ambitious health-care overhaul sought by President Barack Obama. It may prevail because it would help keep the pharmaceutical industry on board with the overhaul, said industry lobbyists and Senate staffers.
But the question of how long to protect brand-name biologics' intellectual property -- referred to as their 'exclusivity' -- has caused a rift in the health committee, which oversees the Food and Drug Administration, and in the overall Senate, industry representatives and Senate staff said.
It has also sparked an advertising battle between consumer groups, which want a shorter period of exclusivity for biologics, and the industry, which has said such an approach would hamper innovation.
Biologics, such as Amgen's Epogen for cancer patients, are generally made from proteins manufactured in living cells, and they are far more complex than traditional chemical drugs. The biologics industry is growing at 18% a year and could hit $100 billion in sales by 2011, according to generic drug makers.
Without sufficient exclusivity, "the biotech industry will not have the incentive to take high risks required for development and innovation in biologic life-saving drugs," said industry lobbyist Jim Greenwood.
Sen. Kennedy, whose state includes large biotechnology companies and research centers, has consistently advocated the brand-name makers' position, as have some other Democratic health committee members, including Patty Murray (D., Wash.) and Barbara Mikulski (D., Md.).
But some other Democratic senators, including Chuck Schumer of New York and Sherrod Brown of Ohio, as well as the chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, California's Henry Waxman, favor strict limits on brand-name biotechnology products to cut drug costs.
Messrs. Brown and Schumer and Mr. Waxman have introduced separate bills this year, supported by consumer groups, that propose a base of five years' exclusivity, with a possibility of extension.
Just remember, it's a toll number.
MLN is powered by