Gilead May Not Exclusively Own Truvada's US Patent

Serious questions are being raised concerning whether or not Gilead Sciences ever applied for exclusivity for Truvada's patent and has in effect been illegally keeping generic competition from the market

Truvada Bone Lawsuit News

Wednesday, August 21, 2019 - reports that patent researchers have discovered that Gilead Sciences may not have applied for exclusive patent rights for Truvada in the United States. If Gilead's Truvada exclusive patent is revoked the company could be liable for billions of dollars in claims against them according to HIV advocacy group Prep4All. It is a well-known fact that Truvada was developed using US government grant money extensively so the company's claim to have shelled out billions in up-front costs fails to hold water. In addition, people are angered that Gilead could be using their government-generated Truvada profits to pay for their failures in developing other drugs. says that if "If the company was found to have been improperly asserting a patent on the drug, it could owe royalties of around $1 billion, according to the Financial Times." More importantly, if Descovey, with its lesser side effects, is found to have been deliberately withheld from the market for financial considerations, Gilead Science could be liable to those who have been injured by the drugs osteoporosis and kidney failure side effects. While it is generally acknowledged that osteoporosis from using Truvada for a short period of time (under one year) may be reversible, experts are not sure of the drug's long-term effects on bone density. Truvada osteoporosis lawsuit attorneys believe persons and the family members of persons who have suffered from Truvada bone problems may be eligible for significant compensation and offer a free consultation.

Patients that have been injured from developing broken bones and kidney failure from taking Truvada are shocked when they learn that Truvada's maker, Gilead Sciences, knew years ago about the drug's deadly side effects and kept a safer alternative drug off of the market due to patent considerations. Gilead is being accused of holding back the PrEP drug Descovy in order to maximize the time that the company has to control the drug's patent and to prevent generic alternative from coming to market. The lower cost of generic drugs is the focus of those who are infuriated at having to pay around $1750 per month for their daily dose of Truvada in order to prevent the transmission of HIV from their sexual partner to them. Generic alternatives to Truvada cost under $100 per month in Australia and other countries. Consultants and experts in the pharmaceutical industry in general and drug development in particular point out that Gilead may be right and ethically enforcing what they claim to be their patent on Truvada and Descovy. Experts report that a pharmaceutical company can spend billions of dollars in research and development of other drug and only bring one out of 10 or 20 to market. The one drug that makes it must be priced to reimburse the company for its costs, provide a profit, and more importantly, serve as an incentive for future drug research and development efforts. With the motive of unlimited profits, why would a company shell out the upfront costs?

More Recent Truvada Bone Lawsuit News:

No-Cost, No-Obligation Truvada Lawsuit Case Review If You or a Loved One Suffered from Truvada Bone or Kidney Complications

OnderLaw, LLC is a St. Louis personal injury law firm handling serious injury and death claims across the country. Its mission is the pursuit of justice, no matter how complex the case or strenuous the effort. The Onder Law Firm has represented clients throughout the United States in pharmaceutical and medical device litigation such as Pradaxa, Lexapro and Yasmin/Yaz, where the firm's attorneys held significant leadership roles in the litigation, as well as Actos, DePuy, Risperdal and others. The firm has represented thousands of persons in these and other products liability litigation, including DePuy hip replacement systems, which settled for $2.5 billion and Pradaxa internal bleeding, which settled for $650 million. The Onder Law Firm won over $300 million in four talcum powder ovarian cancer lawsuits in St. Louis to date and other law firms throughout the nation often seek its experience and expertise on complex litigation.