ArticleGlobalization and health2018
Moderating the impact of patent linkage on access to medicines: lessons from variations in South Korea, Australia, Canada, and the United States.
Article in Globalization and health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Increasing competition in pharmaceutical tenders: Patents, treatment guidelines, and centralised procurement of Hepatitis C drugs in Brazil.Global public health · 2026Article
- Patent challenges without entry? Reassessing first generic exclusivity under the patent-linkage system in South Korea.Globalization and health · 2026Article
- Characteristics and outcomes of the drug patent linkage system in China.Globalization and health · 2024Article
- Does the first generic exclusivity system provide an economic incentive for early generic entrance under the patent linkage system?Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Patenting and patent challenges in South Korea after introducing a patent linkage system.Globalization and health · 2022Article
- Perceived impact of the patent linkage system on pharmaceutical market from the viewpoint of the domestic manufacturers in South Korea.Globalization and health · 2022Article
- Patent challenges and factors associated with successful patent challengers under the patent linkage system: recent evidence from South Korea after the Korea United States free trade agreement.Globalization and health · 2021Article
- Market Exclusivity of the Originator Drugs in South Korea: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Frontiers in public health · 2021Article
- Understanding the trends in international agreements on pricing and reimbursement for newly marketed medicines and their implications for access to medicines: a computational text analysis.Globalization and health · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe inclusion of patent linkage mechanisms in bilateral and plurilateral trade and investment agreements has emerged as a key element in the United States' TRIPS-Plus intellectual property (IP) negotiating agenda. However, the provisions establishing patent linkage mechanisms in several agreements appear to reflect a degree of ambiguity, potentially enabling some flexibility in their implementation. In this study, we reviewed the features of the prototypic patent linkage mechanism established by the Hatch-Waxman Act in the United States, and compared these with the implementation of systems in three countries whose agreements with the US include patent linkage obligations. From these analyses, we draw lessons for moderating the impact of these mechanisms on access to generic medicines.
methodsWe reviewed the features of the patent linkage mechanism in the US, and undertook a detailed analysis of relevant treaty provisions and the manner of implementation in Canada, Australia, and South Korea.
resultsA key difference between the US implementation of patent linkage and that of its trading partners is the disparate treatment afforded to biologics. Because of the significant differences in the regulatory frameworks applying to small molecule and biologic medicines in the US, the Hatch- Waxman provisions do not apply to biologics and they are not subject to patent linkage. By contrast, the regulatory frameworks in Canada, Australia and South Korea do not reflect similar distinctions and thus patent linkage mechanisms also capture biologics. Additional variations in implementation, mainly the result of constructive ambiguities in the respective treaty texts, offer potential opportunity for mitigating the adverse impact of patent linkage provisions on market entry of generic medicines. Practical measures include ensuring the availability of an accessible, transparent and easily searchable database of patent information; avoiding automatic stays of generic marketing approval where possible; and requiring certification by rights holders to prevent abuse of the system.
conclusionsWhere countries accept treaty obligations to establish patent linkage mechanisms, the impact on access to generic medicines may be moderated to a degree by retaining and exploiting constructive ambiguities in the treaty text and addressing practical aspects of implementation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.