본문 바로가기
  • Home

A Critical Study of the Arguments for and against a Moratorium on Glivec

  • Korean Journal of Medical Ethics
  • Abbr : 의료윤리
  • 2017, 20(3), pp.257-275
  • DOI : 10.35301/ksme.2017.20.3.257
  • Publisher : The Korean Society For Medical Ethics
  • Research Area : Medicine and Pharmacy > General Medicine
  • Received : August 29, 2017
  • Accepted : September 12, 2017
  • Published : September 30, 2017

Jeong Chang-rok 1 LEE,JinWon 2 KO,Karam 3

1경북대학교
2동국대학교
3한국생명의료윤리연구모임

Accredited

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.

Citation status

* References for papers published after 2022 are currently being built.