Robinson said she didn't get any prodding from industry to introduce her measure. Legislators in four other states, however, said they proposed bills restricting epilepsy drug exchanges this year at the prompting of the drug industry or organizations supported by pharmaceutical companies.
Carol Pitts, a Republican state representative in South Dakota, said she grew concerned about pharmacists substituting drugs while at a January 2007 conference for female state legislators held at Marco Island, Fla. "I had not heard of that concept being talked about, but it made a lot of sense," said the dietitian.
The conference was sponsored by Women in Government, a nonprofit that receives an undisclosed amount of its $2.5 million yearly budget from Abbott, GlaxoSmithKline, Ortho-McNeil-Janssen's parent and other pharmaceutical companies. The organization has given several presentations on epilepsy treatment to raise awareness among legislators and protect patients, a spokeswoman said.
An Epilepsy Foundation official, Alexandra K. Finucane, vice president of legal and government affairs, helped give the presentation that Pitts attended. Back home, Pitts got help drafting a bill from an Epilepsy Foundation lobbyist, Pitts and the lobbyist said.
Several industry officials sit on the foundation's board, and 10 percent of its $20 million budget comes from contributions by pharmaceutical companies, including epilepsy drugmakers, officials said.
Eric R. Hargis, the group's president, said the donations support fundraising. Hargis said the legislative push was prompted by complaints from epilepsy patients whose pharmacists didn't say their drug was being exchanged for another or presented the switch as a cheap, harmless and easy choice. Then the patients suffered seizures that risked their health and had serious consequences, such as losing their driving privileges.
Hargis emphasized that the foundation's model legislation would also require pharmacists to get consent for switching between generic drugs, and he said the group is pursuing other steps, such as urging the FDA to assess the interchangeability of brand-name and generic epilepsy drugs.
Industry efforts to limit sales of generic drugs stem from the 1984 federal law that authorized the cheaper copies. Over the years, major drugmakers have filed patent infringement suits that delay sales of generics and have paid generic drugmakers to refrain from developing a competing drug.
"Now we're morphing into going to states," said Frank Palumbo, executive director of the Center on Drugs and Public Policy at the University of Maryland's School of Pharmacy.
jonathan.rockoff@baltsun.com
By the numbers
* States considering measures limiting generics in 2008: 27
* States that have approved measures within past year: 2
* 2007 generic drug sales: $58.5 billion
* 2007 brand-name prescription drug sales: $228 billion
Sources: National Association of Chain Drug Stores; Generic Pharmaceutical Association
