• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Fact check: Drugmaker Gilead Sciences claimed rights to a possible COVID-19 treatment

JEDIYoda

Lifer
drug companies profiteering off this virus.....who would have guessed.....
Even though after the fact they qithdrew their request...



The claim: Gilead Sciences received special protective status from the FDA for a drug that may effectively treat COVID-19
On Tuesday, the website Common Dreams published an article lambasting the Food and Drug Administration’s decision to provide pharmaceutical company Gilead Sciences “orphan” drug status for its antiviral drug remdesivir. The drug is among several potential treatments for the novel coronavirus.

The article relies heavily on a report in the Intercept, which reported on the story Monday night after the FDA approved special status for the drug that afternoon.

The Common Dreams article also includes tweets from Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and the advocacy group Social Security Works criticizing the move.

Common Dreams is a nonprofit website based in Portland, Maine. Its stories often aggregate reporting and commentary from prominent figures in progressive American politics. The site also frequently republishes state propaganda from leftist governments, especially Telesur, the Latin American news network with ties to the Cuban, Nicaraguan and Venezuelan governments.

Orphan drug status and Gilead’s antiviral treatment
Initially developed as a potential treatment for the Ebola and Marburg viruses, Gilead Sciences developed remdesivir alongside the Department of Defense, later deploying the drug during the 2014-16 Ebola epidemic in west Africa. The antirviral proved effective against a broad range of viruses, though it was not yet considered to be a perfect treatment for any specific disease.

Gilead had previously faced pressure to find ways to monetize antiviral drugs like remdesivir from investors prior to its application to the FDA, according to a separate report from The Intercept.

On Sunday, Gilead announced that it would stop allowing access to remdesivir for patients while it transitioned from providing individual compassionate use requests to an expanded access program.

"During this transition period, we are unable to accept new individual compassionate use requests due to an overwhelming demand over the last several days," the statement said.

On Monday afternoon, the FDA designated remdesivir as an “orphan” status drug.

"Orphan" drug status is a designation for medicines that treat conditions that would otherwise be unprofitable for companies to invest research and development resources in. The status provides certain government benefits, including exclusive rights to distribution, that ostensibly incentivize companies to address lesser-known diseases.

The FDA will provide orphan status to any medication that treats a disease that afflicts fewer than 200,000 people in the United States. However, the criteria for qualification says that approval “is defined as the number of persons in the United States who have been diagnosed as having the disease or condition at the time of the submission of the request for orphan-drug designation.”

At the time of Gilead’s submission to approve remdesivir for orphan status, there were fewer than 50,000 cases in the United States.

The drugmaker received significant criticism after it received approval for orphan drug status, including from Sanders. "We will not tolerate profiteering. Any treatment or vaccine must be made free for all," the senator and presidential candidate tweeted.

On Wednesday, Gilead issued another statement, saying that it had withdrawn its request for orphan status for remdesivir.

“Gilead is confident that it can maintain an expedited timeline in seeking regulatory review of remdesivir, without the orphan drug designation,” it read.

Our ruling: True
The claim that pharmaceutical company Gilead Sciences requested and received approval for a special status for a potential COVID-19 treatment is TRUE based on our research.

While it is still unclear whether remdesivir is an effective antiviral treatment against the novel coronavirus, trials to determine that will now proceed without special FDA status for the drug.
 
I don't actually know what to think of this. Is Gilead or anyone else running trials of remdesivir for COVID-19 regardless of orphan drug status? If they aren't willing to spend the tens of millions plus to run clinical trials without the potential for profit, then not receiving orphan drug status would mean a potential treatment would never be investigated. The whole point of the program is to incentivize research into treatments that normally wouldn't be worth the costs. The article states trials are proceeding anyway. I wonder if they ever would have had the orphan drug status never been approved in the first place. Abandoning the trials at this point would have been even worse PR. But they might shave some cost and go slower as a result.
 
I don't actually know what to think of this. Is Gilead or anyone else running trials of remdesivir for COVID-19 regardless of orphan drug status? If they aren't willing to spend the tens of millions plus to run clinical trials without the potential for profit, then not receiving orphan drug status would mean a potential treatment would never be investigated. The whole point of the program is to incentivize research into treatments that normally wouldn't be worth the costs. The article states trials are proceeding anyway. I wonder if they ever would have had the orphan drug status never been approved in the first place. Abandoning the trials at this point would have been even worse PR. But they might shave some cost and go slower as a result.
The big deal in this is that one drug company should not have the exclusive right to this drug when so many people need to have this drug...in essence they can charge whatever they feel like charging and nonody can do crap about it.......
 
The big deal in this is that one drug company should not have the exclusive right to this drug when so many people need to have this drug...in essence they can charge whatever they feel like charging and nonody can do crap about it.......
And that gives zero incentive for companies to race for these drugs... This is what America gets wrong about capitalism and socialism. Its not one OR the other, black or white, there is middle ground.
 
And that gives zero incentive for companies to race for these drugs... This is what America gets wrong about capitalism and socialism. Its not one OR the other, black or white, there is middle ground.
You would think they could all work together and share the profits.....makes more sense IMO!
 
The big deal in this is that one drug company should not have the exclusive right to this drug when so many people need to have this drug...in essence they can charge whatever they feel like charging and nonody can do crap about it.......

The drug is not studied in COVID-19. There needs to be a logical point where finances make sense to perform the studies. If it is useful and no one adequately investigates that because there's no financial benefit to doing so, then that is a worse situation. In this particular case, I don't know the calculus. I wonder if it would not make sense for the government to be giving big research grants out there for existing drugs with any reasonable potential for benefit as an alternative. That's a very large dollar number to commit, but it pales in comparison to the economic stimulus package.
 
Back
Top