|
|
|
Today, a closer look at why Congress should pass the EPIC Act and end the “pill penalty,” and some ideas on how policy can encourage a more sustainable bioeconomy. (474 words, 2 minutes, 22 seconds) |
|
|
|
|
Why Congress should pass the EPIC Act |
|
|
With half of a medicine’s total revenue often achieved from sales in years 10 through 13, the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) “pill penalty” strongly disincentivizes lifesaving drug development.
What’s the problem? The IRA grants small molecule drugs nine years of protection from price controls, while biologics have 13. Typically pills, small molecule drugs are the most common kind of drug.
What’s the cure? The EPIC Act, introduced in Congress on Jan. 31, would amend the IRA to grant small molecules 13 years of price control protection. BIO supports it.
Why it matters: Medicines often recoup half the revenue needed to justify R&D investment through sales achieved in the 10th through 13th year after they enter the market. This makes the 9-year threshold a particularly strong, and unscientific, disincentive against investing in and developing small molecule drugs.
BIO's view: “The bipartisan introduction of the Ensuring Pathways to Innovative Cures (EPIC) Act is a critical step toward removing a punitive penalty on the development of small-molecule medicines, a vital class of treatments for patients around the globe," says BIO Interim CEO Rachel King. "This legislation would fix a section of the Inflation Reduction Act and make certain that we are not disincentivizing the development of small molecule drugs that are often more accessible for patients.
|
|
|
|
|
Policy can encourage a more sustainable bioeconomy, scientists say |
|
|
As the U.S. government seeks to build the bioeconomy, more can be done to ensure this effort increases sustainability, according to the Federation of American Scientists (FAS).
Why it matters: The Bioeconomy Executive Order is a year-old multi-agency federal initiative promoting the growth of a “safe, secure and sustainable” bioeconomy. Appropriate policy can do more on the “sustainable” aspect, FAS says.
Think federally, act locally: Programs like the Economic Development Administration (EDA) Tech Hubs and National Science Foundation (NSF) Regional Innovation Engines encourage local innovation clusters or “microbioeconomies.” These rely on region-specific strengths, encouraging companies to build off one another while focusing more on the local environment, FAS says.
Federal efforts can reward companies’ sustainable approaches to encourage innovation geared toward sustainability, FAS says.
We should encourage a circular economy approach—like the recent collaboration between Ford and Jose Cuervo to use agave plant waste from tequila production to make bioplastics for vehicles. (Other examples include Virent’s plastics from recycled carbon or crop waste, Geno’s plant-based plastics and industrial raw materials, and LanzaTech’s bioplastics, biofuels, and fragrances made from industrial carbon.)
The bottom line: “Biobased products do indeed hold enormous promise for promoting economic growth while mitigating environmental challenges,” and policy can encourage this, according to FAS. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
