These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
193 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23783361)
1. Regulators can challenge deals that delay generic competition, says US Supreme Court. McCarthy M BMJ; 2013 Jun; 346():f3964. PubMed ID: 23783361 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Supreme Court to decide whether payments by patent holders to delay production of generics are anticompetitive. Roehr B BMJ; 2012 Dec; 345():e8464. PubMed ID: 23236054 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Reanalyzing reverse payment settlements: a solution to the patentee's dilemma. Wang Z Cornell Law Rev; 2014 Jul; 99(5):1227-58. PubMed ID: 25112001 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Delaying generic competition--corporate payoffs and the future of Plavix. Shuchman M N Engl J Med; 2006 Sep; 355(13):1297-300. PubMed ID: 17005945 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. AstraZeneca must pay €52.5m fine for anticompetitive tactics, rules European court. Hawkes N BMJ; 2012 Dec; 345():e8396. PubMed ID: 23230222 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Intellectual property. Drug patents at the Supreme Court. Hemphill CS; Sampat B Science; 2013 Mar; 339(6126):1386-7. PubMed ID: 23520096 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. A shift on "pay for delay"--reopening doors for pharmaceutical competition? Hemphill Kraus EJ N Engl J Med; 2012 Nov; 367(18):1681-3. PubMed ID: 23113478 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. On access and accountability--two Supreme Court rulings on generic drugs. Boumil MM; Curfman GD N Engl J Med; 2013 Aug; 369(8):696-7. PubMed ID: 23923990 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. The wake of FTC v. Actavis: practical implications on the pharmaceutical industry. Ritter M; Tempesta J; Ragusa P Pharm Pat Anal; 2014 Jul; 3(4):345-7. PubMed ID: 25291307 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Supreme Court rules in favor of 'pay-for-delay' settlements. Sklan A Pharm Pat Anal; 2013 Sep; 2(5):582-3. PubMed ID: 24386654 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Possible anticompetitive agreements between brand, generic companies to be studied. Landis NT Am J Health Syst Pharm; 2000 Dec; 57(23):2140, 2142. PubMed ID: 11127691 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Should a Law Governing the Pharmaceutical Market Be Ethically Examined Based on Its Intent or Its Practical Applications? Warchol JM AMA J Ethics; 2019 Aug; 21(8):E661-667. PubMed ID: 31397661 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The Eleventh Circuit holds that agreements in which pharmaceutical companies pay generic companies not to compete may be valid. Garrigues A J Law Med Ethics; 2004; 32(1):181-4. PubMed ID: 15152443 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Antitrust, Market Exclusivity, and Transparency in the Pharmaceutical Industry. Sinha MS; Curfman GD; Carrier MA JAMA; 2018 Jun; 319(22):2271-2272. PubMed ID: 29801104 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. A trade agreement's impact on access to generic drugs. Shaffer ER; Brenner JE Health Aff (Millwood); 2009; 28(5):w957-68. PubMed ID: 19706626 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Branded drug reformulation: the next brand vs. generic antitrust battleground. Amoresano GV Food Drug Law J; 2007; 62(1):249-56. PubMed ID: 17444032 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Pharmaceutical patent settlements: the antitrust risks. Balto DA Food Drug Law J; 2000; 55(3):321-41. PubMed ID: 11824464 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. The "reverse payment paradox": an overview of the legality of reverse exclusionary payments in the pharmaceutical industry. Brockmeier MS Health Care Law Mon; 2010 Mar; 2010(3):2-10. PubMed ID: 20329564 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. A Citizen's Pathway Gone Astray - Delaying Competition from Generic Drugs. Feldman R; Wang C N Engl J Med; 2017 Apr; 376(16):1499-1501. PubMed ID: 28248550 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]