Two insurance companies recently filed an antitrust lawsuit against Gilead Sciences Inc., claiming that the company has reached an agreement with other pharmaceutical companies to slow down its generic antiretroviral drugs
The Foster City, California-based drugmaker is one of the top manufacturers of HIV drugs, some of which include a combination of multiple antiretroviral drugs to slow the progression of the virus.Lawsuit filed this week Humanity and century Allegedly, because Gilead’s antiretroviral drug patent is about to expire, it has reached an agreement with other companies to produce combined antiretroviral therapies and prohibit them from using generic drugs.
For example, in 2004, Gilead and Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS) reached an agreement to combine Gilead’s Truvada drug with BMS’s Sustiva, A drug called AtriplaThe agreement with BMS includes a “non-generic drug restriction” clause that will prevent the two companies from using generic drugs of each other’s drugs in Atripla.
A few years later, it reached an agreement with Janssen to merge its Endurant drug and Truvada into a treatment called Complera, which also included a non-generic drug restriction clause.
Finally, these lawsuits also questioned so-called “delayed payment” transactions, which would delay potential generic competitors from bringing their drugs to the market. In 2013, Gilead reached a settlement with Teva Pharmaceuticals, which planned to use tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (a prodrug of tenofovir) to make a generic drug. This will erode Gilead’s profits from the drug in the name of Viread.
After the settlement, Teva agreed not to pullIt was not until 2017 that generic drugs were cancelled, and Gilead agreed to take the lead before Teva launched its own generic drugs. They reached a similar settlement in 2014, and Teva agreed to postpone the general version of Truvada and Atripla until 2020.
In both cases, insurance companies are seeking permanent injunctions, stating that the company’s actions violated antitrust laws, and triple damages.
In an emailed statement, Chris Ridley, Gilead’s senior director of media relations, stated that the lawsuit “distorts and misstates GileadHistory, cooperation with partners, and settlement agreements. “
“Gilead I believe this lawsuit and its antitrust allegations are groundless,” he wrote.
This is not the first time Gilead has faced antitrust lawsuits related to these agreements. Earlier this year, CVS and Rite Aid sued Gilead, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Teva claimed that they suppressed and postponed the generic competition for Gilead’s HIV drugs.
At the same time, combined antiretroviral drugs for HIV are still expensive, and approximately 1.2 million people in the United States are infected with HIV. According to statistics, one month’s supply of the brand Truvada still exceeds 2,000 US dollars. Easy to receive, And Atripla’s cost is only $4,000. According to the lawsuit, many of these drugs cost less than $10 to produce.
Both cases were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. They are:
- Humana Inc. v. Gilead Sciences, Inc., etc.
- Centene Corp. v. Gilead Sciences, Inc., etc.
Photo credit: AVNphotolab, Getty Images
