Prasco and GPhA response on FTC Report on Authorized Generics, during the 180-day Exclusivity Period

Various organisation have reacted diffrently to Federal Trade Commission report on Authorized Generics, during the 180-day Exclusivity Period. The generic player Prasco (an authorized generic leader) and Generic pharmaceutical Association (GPhA) has released press release on this issue.

Prasco applauds FTC report

Prasco Laboratories, a Mason-based independent authorized generic company, applauds the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) for issuing their interim report on the short and long-term effects of authorized generics on competition in the prescription drug marketplace.

Prasco commends the FTC in its approach. “This Interim Report is the result of a long and arduous process in response to a 2005 request by Senators Leahy, Grassley, and Rockefeller to review the impact of the practice of authorized generics on competition during the 180-day exclusivity period,” stated E. Thomas Arington, Chairman and CEO of Prasco. “The Commission’s analysis supports the pro-consumer impact of the increased competition that authorized generics bring to the generic drug industry, and the resulting savings to the American consumer,” stated Arington.

Prasco press release Here

The Generic Pharmaceutical Association (GPhA) opposed authorized Generics, during the 180-day Exclusivity Period

The Generic Pharmaceutical Association (GPhA) released the following statement today from GPhA President and CEO Kathleen Jaeger in response to the release of the FTC Interim Report on Authorized Generic Drugs.

“While we have not had an opportunity to read the entire FTC report, the fact is that authorized generics harm, not help consumers. Authorized generics are yet another tactic that brand pharmaceutical companies have in their arsenal to keep affordable generic medicines from consumers.

“Authorized generics undermine Congressional intent by undercutting the 180-day exclusivity period for generic manufacturers. Congress provided the 180-day incentive as a means to foster investment by generic companies to challenge questionable and weak brand patents with the ultimate goal of providing more timely access to and greater choices of affordable medicines. Simply put, but for the generic challenger, there would be no price competition. Permitting brand companies to undercut the incentive is just not sound public policy.

GPhA press release Here