While the term “delinkage” has been around since at least 2005, it is not seen or heard very often. It is the term used in the biomedical field by lawyers and politicians to mean a new way of funding drug R&D such that the patent system could be replaced with the result that a drug monopoly would not exist and drug prices would be significantly lower. One of the advocates of this is Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders submitted the Medical Innovation Prize Fund as legislation in 2017 that would deny monopoly rights to pharma innovators and create a government fund.
Delinkage is discussed in a Patent Strategy article Delinkage embraced innational elections as alternative to patents (ManagingIP, C. Kilpatrick, Nov. 14, 2019) The article notes that in 2017 prescription drug spending was $334B and that US national healthcare spending was 17.9% of GDP. That’s right, the US GDP, which is now at $20T devotes 18% toward healthcare! That’s approaching $4T when all healthcare from all sources are included! The high price of drugs is a big part of the escalation. Anecdotes and reports abound of grossly high prices for a drug and patients who go without needed medication because they cannot afford it.
“We cannot control costs, reduce access barriers and protect and enhance innovation unless we change the way we finance biomedical R&D. Delinkage is a radical and transformative approach to bring policy coherence to objectives regarding access, innovation and cost control.” (Knowledge, Ecology International, Delinkage.org)
The fact that this has been floating around since 2005 is proof positive that there is not a lot of momentum behind it. Fundamental questions abound about how, how to, what if, where would the money to fund multiple projects over multiple years come from? What if it doesn’t work? Who pays? What would the impact on the patent system — defined in the US Constitution — be? There are international implications for patents so how would delinkage work globally? What happens to the patent system if biomedical is carved out? Is this a slippery slope, domino effect?
At the risk of getting way out in front of our headlights, here is a possible middle road for consideration. Keep the existing patent system as is or improved, allow the pharma company to obtain funding (much of it comes from the federal government anyway, including FDA, DARPA, Health and Human Services, etc.). When the drug is approved for a market, the patent(s) is(are) treated like a Standards patents. That is, it must be licensed to any and all, with a standard royalty rate, with all appropriate terms and conditions. Multiple providers should result in reduced prices.
How do we control costs while protecting innovation? Delinkage might be a possible solution in Pharma.
Non-Sustainable Healthcare Costs Revisited
It is important to note the projection that Hall and Knab identified in a 2012 article related to healthcare costs in the US. Healthcare costs in the US had increased from 6% of GDP a few decades ago. Healthcare costs for several decades had increased by about 10% per year. During the Great Recession, this run-away healthcare costs has reduced to 4% or 5% per year, but still double or triple the rate of inflation. Some of the calming of combined healthcare costs can be attributed to many drug patents expiring, to the great recession, and to Obama Care (especially the early years of ACA).
So, here is the trick question. If health care inflation rises back up to 10% per year, GDP growth is at 2.5% and general inflation is 2%, how many years before combined healthcare costs exceed the US GDP? Obviously, the out-of-control healthcare costs is not sustainable, but this question helps to put it all into focus. Answer: In the described case, it would take less than 24 years before healthcare costs exceeded the US GDP!. For healthcare to increase to 50% of the US DGP would take only about 14 years.
This out-of-control costs is horribly unacceptable. It is an unsustainable and compounding problem. Plus, the US spends more on healthcare (pre capita) than any other country, and generally has worse results!
So, we are back to the question, what can be done here in addressing this problem? Ignoring the problem, and even adding to it, like the federal deficit, has an ugly way of coming back and biting us in the hinny.
Maybe there’s something to the delinkage approach that can work for (almost) everyone and make a difference in bending the healthcare costs curve?
Just to be clear, we at IPZine love innovation, we fully respect and believe in Intellectual Property, and we like capitalism – especially in places where it is sustainable and doesn’t create unmaintainable results.
Delinkage has interesting possibilities.
Reference
Hall, E. B., & Knab, E. F. (2012, July). Social irresponsibility provides opportunity for the win-win-win of Sustainable Leadership. In C. A. Lentz (Ed.), The refractive thinker: Vol. 7. Social responsibility (pp. 197-220). Las Vegas, NV: The Refractive Thinker® Press. ISBN: 978-0-9840054-2-0