The Supreme Court case that could slow generic drugs

It’s a case you’ve (probably) never heard of: This week, the Supreme Court is hearing oral arguments in *Hikma v. Amarin* — a legal battle that could impact how much you ultimately pay for prescription drugs.  Here’s why the case matters: As soon as a generic version of a brand-name drug comes to market, its price typically drops by half. Within 10 years, by more than 75%. Meaning: the sooner we have access to generics, the less we pay at the pharmacy counter.  But one of the fastest legal pathways for generic companies to get their drugs to market may be about to get a lot narrower – depending on how the court rules later this year. Amarin, a brand-name drugmaker, has accused Hikma, a generic company, of encouraging doctors to infringe on their patent for a drug called Vascepa.   The case revolves around the legal concept of *skinny labels*: a carveout in drug patent law that allows generic companies to bring drugs to market when one of the brand-name drug’s patents has expired, but others haven’t. And it raises the (unexpected) question of whether it’s OK for a generic drug company to call their product the *generic version* of something.  Legal experts help us unpack the nerdy details – including how this case came to be, and what’s at stake for both generic drug companies and anyone looking forward to one day paying less for an expensive brand-name drug.  Want to learn how these drug monopolies work – and came to be in the first place? Check out our previous episode: Why drugs cost so much, 101: Medicine monopolies Here's a copy of this episode's transcript.  Send your stories and questions. Or call 724 ARM-N-LEG. And of course we’d love for you to support this show. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.