By PharmaCompass
2019-05-30
Impressions: 126 Article
Last week, the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) alleged that Focus Pharmaceuticals, Medreich, Alliance Pharmaceuticals and Lexon entered into an anti-competitive agreement, restricting the supply of nausea and dizziness medicine — prochlorperazine. In this manner, the companies breached laws in both the UK and EU.
CMA has alleged that Alliance Pharmaceuticals supplied prochlorperazine exclusively to Focus Pharmaceuticals. And Focus paid Lexon a share of the profits and Lexon then shared these payments with Medreich.
However, prior to these agreements, Lexon and Medreich had been jointly readying the launch of another prochlorperazine product. And even though Medreich obtained a license to supply prochlorperazine in January 2014, it did not supply the product until November 2017.
The allegations follow CMA’s finding that the prices paid for prochlorperazine by the National Health Service (NHS) between December 2013 and December 2017 rose by about 700 percent — from US$ 8.23 (£6.49) per pack of 50 tablets to US$ 65.50 (£51.68)
Ann Pope, CMA senior director of antitrust, said: “The NHS should not be denied the opportunity of benefitting from an increased choice of suppliers, or lower prices, for important medicine.”
Alliance said it has had no involvement in the pricing or distribution of prochlorperazine since 2013, when it was out-licensed by the company to Focus Pharmaceuticals Limited on an exclusive basis.
Similarly, Advanz Pharma said the statement of objections issued by the CMA “includes matters that pre-date the company’s ownership of the medicine, which was acquired from Cinven and certain other sellers as a result of a transaction to purchase Amdipharm Mercury Limited, which closed on October 21, 2015.”
The PharmaCompass Newsletter – Sign Up, Stay Ahead
Feedback, help us to improve. Click here
Image Credit : #Phisper Infographic by SCORR MARKETING & PharmaCompass is licensed under CC BY 2.0
“ The article is based on the information available in public and which the author believes to be true. The author is not disseminating any information, which the author believes or knows, is confidential or in conflict with the privacy of any person. The views expressed or information supplied through this article is mere opinion and observation of the author. The author does not intend to defame, insult or, cause loss or damage to anyone, in any manner, through this article.”






