In terms of the interactions with patient organizations, the code specifies that companies should not only respect the autonomy of patient organizations and their independence, but also ensure that support for patient advocacy organizations in the form of grants or charitable contributions not be conditional on promoting a specific medicine.
This week, the Association for Accessible Medicines (AAM) released a new code of business ethics for its member companies. The new code will take effect on September 1, 2018.
“The AAM Code of Business Ethics stands out from other pharmaceutical industry codes because of AAM’s clear recognition of the ethical value of access to medicines for patients. Our new code also priorities market competition as a driving force,” said AAM president and CEO Chip Davis in a statement.
The code incorporates the following goals and criteria for its members:
In terms of the interactions with patient organizations, the code goes on to specify that companies should not only respect the autonomy of patient organizations, but also ensure that support for patient advocacy organizations in the form of grants or charitable contributions not be conditional on promoting a specific medicine.
The announcement of AAM’s new code comes on the heels of the recent launch of the new database, “Pre$cription for Power,” developed by Kaiser Health News (KHN). The database evaluated the 20 pharmaceutical companies, and logged 12,000 donations from the companies to patient advocacy groups in 2015. The data show that the pharmaceutical companies contributed at least $116 million to patient groups in 2015 alone. These data have caused some concern among stakeholders, who feel that the financial ties are troubling if they have caused a patient group to act in a way that does not represent the interest of its members.
AAM’s new code of business ethics addresses some of these concerns in regulations for its own members.
“We must never take the ethics of healthcare access for granted. Our companies believe in our ethical mission, and AAM’s Board of Directors has approved this code. AAM looks forward to working with all stakeholders to expand access to generic and biosimilar medicines—the proven, reliable way to drive down the cost of medicine, which helps patients, strengthens our economy, and benefits our society,” says the organization.
Senators Introduce Bipartisan Legislation to Protect Skinny Labeling
January 2nd 2025To close out the year, 4 senators came together to introduce a new bipartisan bill to protect biosimilar and generic drug manufacturers from patent litigation when obtaining “skinny label” approvals for their products.
Biosimilars Policy Roundup for September 2024—Podcast Edition
October 6th 2024On this episode of Not So Different, we discuss the FDA's approval of a new biosimilar for treating retinal conditions, which took place in September 2024 alongside other major industry developments, including ongoing legal disputes and broader trends in market dynamics and regulatory challenges.
How Vertical Integration Drives Innovation and Access in Biosimilars
December 27th 2024Elie Bahou, PharmD, highlights how vertical integration in the biosimilar industry streamlines costs, improves supply reliability, accelerates market adoption, and enhances patient access, while emphasizing the value of collaboration, quality control, and value-based contracts for sustainable health care delivery.
13 Strategies to Avoid the Nocebo Effect During Biosimilar Switching
December 18th 2024A systematic review identified 13 strategies, including patient and provider education, empathetic communication, and shared decision-making, to mitigate the nocebo effect in biosimilar switching, emphasizing the need for a multifaceted approach to improve patient perceptions and therapeutic outcomes.
BioRationality: Withdrawal of Proposed Terminal Disclaimer Rule Spells Major Setback for Biosimilars
December 10th 2024The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)’s withdrawal of its proposed terminal disclaimer rule is seen as a setback for biosimilar developers, as it preserves patent prosecution practices that favor originator companies and increases costs for biosimilar competition, according to Sarfaraz K. Niazi, PhD.