Why One Drug Company Held Back a Better Drug

<p>For decades, drugmakers have argued that patents are critical to bringing new drugs to the market. But in 2004, when a promising H.I.V. treatment emerged, Gilead Sciences decided to slow-walk its release to maximize profit on the company’s existing patents.</p><p>Rebecca Robbins, who covers the pharmaceutical industry for The Times, discusses one man’s case and how patents can create perverse incentives to delay new and better drugs.</p><p>Guest: <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/by/rebecca-robbins">Rebecca Robbins</a>, a business reporter covering the pharmaceutical industry for The New York Times.</p><p>Background reading: </p><ul><li><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/22/business/gilead-hiv-drug-tenofovir.html">Gilead delayed a new version of a drug</a>, allowing it to extend the patent life of a blockbuster line of medications, internal documents showed.</li><li>In August, an expert panel<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/22/health/hiv-prep-truvada-descovy.html?searchResultPosition=1"> recommended the new daily pill Descovy for H.I.V. prevention</a>.</li></ul><p>For more information on today’s episode, visit <a href="http://nytimes.com/thedaily?smid=pc-thedaily">nytimes.com/thedaily</a>. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.</p>