MSD under CMA investigation over unfair Remicade pricing
pharmafile | May 24, 2017 | News story | Research and Development, Sales and Marketing | Competition and Marketing Authority, MSD, Remicade
MSD is facing legal trouble after the Competition and Marketing Authority (CMA) alleged that the pharmaceutical firm had engaged in anti-competition practices by implementing an unfair discount scheme for one of its top drugs, Remicade (infliximab).
Remicade currently reaps $10 billion in worldwide sales for its use in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis. However, the introduction of biosimilar competition is beginning to impact sales, as biosimilars from Biogen/Samsung Bioepis and Mundipharma have emerged in the European market marketed at a lower price than the originator product.
With this latest investigation, MSD is accused of abusing its dominant position in these markets by offering its drug at a price which was intended to neutralise opposition from biosimilar versions.
“The CMA has provisionally found that MSD broke competition law by abusing its dominant position through a discount scheme for Remicade that was likely to restrict competition from ‘biosimilar’ versions of infliximab that were new to the market,” noted the watchdog, adding: “At this stage of the CMA’s investigation, these findings are provisional and no conclusion should be drawn that there has in fact been any breach of competition law.”
The CMA originally opened the case in December 2015 and claims it will consider any evidence carefully before coming to a decision. MSD has maintained confident that it has acted lawfully and is fully cooperating with the investigation: “MSD is confident that the proceedings will show that MSD has complied with competition law at all times. The discounts in question meant that infliximab was competitively priced and offered savings to the UK National Health Service, without hindering competition. The Statement of Objections sets out the CMA’s provisional views only – it is not a finding that MSD has infringed competition law and MSD welcomes the opportunity to respond.”
If found guilty, MSD could face a maximum penalty equivalent to 10% of its global turnover. Only last year, Pfizer and Flynn Pharma were collectively fined £90 million for its behaviour regarding increasing the cost of an anti-epilepsy drug by the CMA.
Matt Fellows
Related Content
Merck and Daiichi Sankyo expand development and commericalisation agreement to include MK-6070
Daiichi Sankyo and Merck (known as MSD outside of the US and Canada) have announced …
Merck shares data from phase 3 trial of Keytruda for gastric cancers
Merck, known as MSD outside of the US and Canada, has announced data from the …
Merck to acquire Harpoon Therapeutics for approximately $680m
Merck (known as MSD outside of the US and Canada) and Harpoon Therapeutics have announced …
