Jazz, Hikma must face 'reverse payment' claims over narcolepsy drug
By Mike Scarcella
Aug 27 (Reuters) -Drug companies Jazz JAZZ.O and Hikma HIK.L must face claims that they schemed to delay a generic version of Jazz’s blockbuster narcolepsy drug Xyrem, causing health plans to pay higher prices, a U.S. judge in California has ruled.
U.S. District Judge Richard Seeborg’s ruling on Monday night in San Francisco cleared a path to trial on some claims in the long-running multidistrict legal action. Some of the plaintiffs' claims were thrown out in the order.
The plaintiffs include Blue Cross Blue Shield Association, the city of Providence, Rhode Island, and New York State Teamsters Council Health and Hospital Fund.
They have alleged Jazz violated U.S. antitrust law through a monetary payment that kept a rival generic off the market longer than it otherwise would have been, and by dispensing Xyrem through a single specialty pharmacy.
Jazz in a statement on Tuesday said the judge's order "meaningfully" trimmed the plaintiffs' claims, and the company remained "confident about the strength of its defenses."
Hikma on Tuesday did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Both companies have denied any wrongdoing.
Attorneys for the plaintiffs at Girard Sharp and Motley Rice did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Xyrem, a central nervous system depressant, has been on the market since 2002, when it was manufactured by Orphan Medical. Ireland-based Jazz acquired Orphan in 2005.
The plaintiffs allege Jazz, between 2007 and 2014, raised the price of Xyrem by more than 800%. In 2021, Jazz sold more than $1.8 billion of Xyrem, according to a company report.
Hikma had U.S. regulatory approval for a generic version of Xyrem by 2017. That year, Hikma settled its lawsuit challenging Jazz patents. The plaintiffs allege the accord was an unlawful “reverse payment agreement" that delayed Hikma from marketing generic Xyrem for years. Hikma’s generic entered the market last year.
Jazz has defended its marketing of Xyrem. It told the judge that a U.S. regulatory agency approved the company’s plan to distribute Xyrem through a single pharmacy. Jazz also said there are other treatments for narcolepsy.
Jazz said it had used coupons and other rebates to help keep patients’ costs for Xyrem low and in line with other narcolepsy drugs.
A status hearing in the case is scheduled for October.
The case is In Re: Xyrem (Sodium Oxybate) Antitrust Litigation, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, No. 3:20-md-02966-RS.
Read more:
Jazz Pharma ruling clears U.S. roadblock for rival narcolepsy drug
Related Assets
Latest News
Disclaimer: The XM Group entities provide execution-only service and access to our Online Trading Facility, permitting a person to view and/or use the content available on or via the website, is not intended to change or expand on this, nor does it change or expand on this. Such access and use are always subject to: (i) Terms and Conditions; (ii) Risk Warnings; and (iii) Full Disclaimer. Such content is therefore provided as no more than general information. Particularly, please be aware that the contents of our Online Trading Facility are neither a solicitation, nor an offer to enter any transactions on the financial markets. Trading on any financial market involves a significant level of risk to your capital.
All material published on our Online Trading Facility is intended for educational/informational purposes only, and does not contain – nor should it be considered as containing – financial, investment tax or trading advice and recommendations; or a record of our trading prices; or an offer of, or solicitation for, a transaction in any financial instruments; or unsolicited financial promotions to you.
Any third-party content, as well as content prepared by XM, such as: opinions, news, research, analyses, prices and other information or links to third-party sites contained on this website are provided on an “as-is” basis, as general market commentary, and do not constitute investment advice. To the extent that any content is construed as investment research, you must note and accept that the content was not intended to and has not been prepared in accordance with legal requirements designed to promote the independence of investment research and as such, it would be considered as marketing communication under the relevant laws and regulations. Please ensure that you have read and understood our Notification on Non-Independent Investment. Research and Risk Warning concerning the foregoing information, which can be accessed here.
