Skip to Main Content
Contribute Try STAT+ Today

In a surprising move, a federal appeals court panel may revisit a controversial decision that has raised concerns about the ability of generic drug makers to supply Americans with lower-cost alternatives to pricey brand-name medicines.

At issue is an odd term with important implications: skinny labeling. The phrase refers to an effort by a generic company to seek regulatory approval to market its medicine for a specific use, but not other patented uses for which a brand-name drug is prescribed. For instance, a generic drug could be marketed to treat one type of heart problem, but not another. By doing so, the generic company seeks to avoid lawsuits claiming patent infringement.

Unlock this article by subscribing to STAT+ and enjoy your first 30 days free!


What is it?

STAT+ is STAT's premium subscription service for in-depth biotech, pharma, policy, and life science coverage and analysis. Our award-winning team covers news on Wall Street, policy developments in Washington, early science breakthroughs and clinical trial results, and health care disruption in Silicon Valley and beyond.

What's included?

  • Daily reporting and analysis
  • The most comprehensive industry coverage from a powerhouse team of reporters
  • Subscriber-only newsletters
  • Daily newsletters to brief you on the most important industry news of the day
  • STAT+ Conversations
  • Weekly opportunities to engage with our reporters and leading industry experts in live video conversations
  • Exclusive industry events
  • Premium access to subscriber-only networking events around the country
  • The best reporters in the industry
  • The most trusted and well-connected newsroom in the health care industry
  • And much more
  • Exclusive interviews with industry leaders, profiles, and premium tools, like our CRISPR Trackr.
  • Was the ‘good’ created by the FDA requirement that the generic drug label be changed overcome the ‘bad’ created by this lawsuit by forcing people to pay more for the same thing? If the answer is ‘no’ then the outcome is an embarrassment to our system and the American people. If the answer is ‘yes’ the label is the greater good, this law has to be changed because it hurts consumers. Then again, we have PBMs to protect us.

Comments are closed.