Chess and Pharma Evergreening: Strategic Moves to Keep Drug Prices High
In the world of chess, every move is calculated, every strategy meticulously planned. The objective is not just to win, but to anticipate your opponent’s moves, control the board, and maintain dominance. Surprisingly, these principles are not confined to the chessboard. Pharmaceutical companies, particularly in their practice of “evergreening,” apply similar strategies to extend the life of their patents and keep drug prices high. Let’s explore how the tactical brilliance seen in chess mirrors the maneuvers of pharma companies.
1. The Opening Gambit: Initial Patent Filings
In chess, the opening moves set the tone for the entire game. Similarly, pharmaceutical companies begin with the filing of a basic patent for a new drug. This patent gives them exclusive rights to sell the drug, typically for 20 years. However, just as in chess, where the opening strategy is only the beginning, the real game begins after the initial patent is secured.
2. Controlling the Center: Dominating the Market
A central principle in chess is to control the center of the board, which gives players more mobility and control over the game. For pharmaceutical companies, controlling the “center” means dominating the market by extending their monopoly as long as possible. This is where evergreening comes into play.
Through evergreening, pharma companies make slight modifications to their drugs—such as changing the formulation, dosage, or delivery method—to file new patents. These new patents effectively extend their market exclusivity, much like a chess player reinforcing control over the center with each move. By doing so, they block generic competitors from entering the market, maintaining their dominance and keeping prices high.
3. The Middle Game: Anticipating Competitors
In the middle game of chess, players must anticipate their opponent’s moves and counter them effectively. Pharmaceutical companies, too, must anticipate the moves of generic manufacturers who seek to introduce cheaper alternatives once the original patent expires.
To stay ahead, pharma companies employ a tactic known as “patent thickets.” This involves filing numerous, overlapping patents for a single drug, creating a dense web of legal protection. Even if one patent is challenged or expires, others remain to protect the drug. This is akin to a chess player building a fortress around their key pieces, making it difficult for the opponent to launch a successful attack.
4. Sacrifice and Trade-Offs: Balancing Risk and Reward
Sacrifices in chess are often made to gain a more advantageous position. Similarly, pharma companies sometimes make calculated trade-offs in their evergreening strategies. For instance, they may reformulate a drug to offer a new benefit, like extended release, which requires new clinical trials and regulatory approval. While this involves additional investment and risk, the reward is an extended period of market exclusivity and continued high prices.
5. The Endgame: Maximizing Value Before the Clock Runs Out
In chess, the endgame is about maximizing the value of the remaining pieces to secure a win. For pharmaceutical companies, the endgame comes as the original patents approach expiration. At this point, the goal is to extract as much value as possible from the drug before generic competition sets in.
Evergreening is the key tactic in this phase, allowing companies to delay the inevitable loss of exclusivity. By securing additional patents, they can extend their monopoly, much like a chess player who strategically maneuvers their remaining pieces to delay checkmate.
Conclusion: The Checkmate of Evergreening
Evergreening is the pharmaceutical industry’s equivalent of a checkmate in chess—a strategy that ensures victory by keeping competitors at bay and maintaining control over the market. Just as a skilled chess player anticipates every move and countermove, pharmaceutical companies use evergreening to outmaneuver generic manufacturers, ensuring that their profits remain protected for as long as possible.
However, while these tactics are legal and often justified as necessary for recouping research and development costs, they also raise ethical questions about access to affordable medications. As in chess, where every move has consequences, the evergreening strategies of pharmaceutical companies have a profound impact on healthcare costs and patient access.
In the end, just as chess requires a balance between offensive and defensive strategies, there is a growing need for balance in the pharmaceutical industry—between protecting innovation and ensuring that life-saving medications remain accessible to all.
