American journal of law & medicine
-
Alongside the constitutional controversy ultimately addressed by the Supreme Court, the colossal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) ushered in a new paradigm for regulation of biologics by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Nestled within the expansive ACA, the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (BPCIA) set forth an abbreviated pathway to market for "biosimilar" and "interchangeable" biological products. ⋯ This article examines the current debate surrounding the use of nonproprietary names for biosimilar biologics, as well as state efforts to reconcile automatic substitution laws for the eventual products. In particular, the article addresses the implications for patients and the United States health care system, highlighting the potential negative effect on anticipated cost-savings, hindrances for effective tracking and reporting of adverse events, and a general lack of consistency in state laws.
-
Prescription painkiller abuse is the fastest growing drug problem in the United States. In the past year, approximately one out of twenty Americans reported misuse or abuse of prescription painkillers. Several factors contribute to the prescription painkiller epidemic. ⋯ The programs currently suffer from inadequate data collection, ineffective utilization of data, insufficient interstate data sharing, and constraints on sharing data with law enforcement and state agencies. By contrast, third-party prescription payment systems run by pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) or health insurers have been effective in detecting prescription drug abuse. This paper suggests that a national prescription drug reporting program building on existing PBM networks could be significantly more effective than existing state PDMPs in detecting prescription drug abuse.
-
Very large biomedical research databases, containing electronic health records (EHR) and genomic data from millions of patients, have been heralded recently for their potential to accelerate scientific discovery and produce dramatic improvements in medical treatments. Research enabled by these databases may also lead to profound changes in law, regulation, social policy, and even litigation strategies. Yet, is "big data" necessarily better data? This paper makes an original contribution to the legal literature by focusing on what can go wrong in the process of biomedical database research and what precautions are necessary to avoid critical mistakes. ⋯ In short, this paper sheds much-needed light on the problems of credulous and uninformed acceptance of research results derived from biomedical databases. An understanding of the pitfalls of big data analysis is of critical importance to anyone who will rely on or dispute its outcomes, including lawyers, policymakers, and the public at large. The Article also recommends technical, methodological, and educational interventions to combat the dangers of database errors and abuses.