|
KMID : 1025620170200030257
|
|
Korean Journal of Medical Ethics
2017 Volume.20 No. 3 p.257 ~ p.275
|
|
|
A Critical Study of the Arguments for and against a Moratorium on Glivec
|
|
Jeong Chang-Rok
Lee Jin-Won
Ko Ka-Ram
|
|
|
Abstract
|
|
|
|
Glivec (Imatinib) is a medication used in the treatment of chronic myelogenous leukemia. This medication, which is manufactured by Norvatis, was licensed for prescription in South Korea in 2002. After being found guilty of providing illegal rebates to doctors who prescribe Glivec, Norvatis was fined by the Korean Ministry of Health. However, this incident has given rise to a debate concerning how exactly Norvatis should be penalized for its illegal actions. On the one hand, some argue that stiffer punishments should be issued, including a moratorium on the sale of Norvatis medication in Korea. On the other hand, some argue that such actions will unfairly punish leukemia patients rather than targeting the company itself. In this article, we examine the medical, pharmaceutical, and ethical arguments that can be given on both sides of this issue.
|
|
|
KEYWORD
|
|
|
Glivec and Generic, rebate two-out rule, moratorium on drugs, patient selection right, social justice, valuebased arguments
|
|
|
FullTexts / Linksout information
|
|
|
|
|
|
Listed journal information
|
|
 
|
|