Jan. 30 Quick Takes: CAFC win for pharmas in 340B case
Plus: Medicines Patent Pool sets goal for growth and Boehringer’s Spevigo meets psoriasis endpoint and updates from Junshi, Simcere and Ribon
“Congress never said that drug makers must deliver discounted Section 340B drugs to an unlimited number of contract pharmacies,” said a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit — the latest development in a long-running dispute between HHS and Sanofi (Euronext:SAN; NASDAQ:SNY), Novo Nordisk A/S (CSE:NOVO B; NYSE:NVO) and AstraZeneca plc (LSE:AZN; NASDAQ:AZN) about the scope of the program. Congress created the 340B program in 1992 to support hospitals and clinics with a disproportionate share of indigent patients by allowing “covered entities” to purchase drugs at discounted prices, but the three pharmas sought to curb the program’s growth by restricting the ability of these entities to outsource the dispensing of the drug. Other pharmas also contesting the scope of the 340B program in separate litigation include Eli Lilly and Co. (NYSE:LLY), Novartis AG (SIX:NOVN; NYSE:NVS), United Therapeutics Corp. (NASDAQ:UTHR) and Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH.
The Medicines Patent Pool set a goal of establishing 10 new licenses, developing five new products, and supporting 10 technology transfers by 2025 as part of its three-year strategy to get 30 million people accessing MPP-licensed products by 2025. The UN-based agency, which was established in 2010 to facilitate access to essential medicines for patients in low- and middle-income countries, received a boost last October when Novartis AG (SIX:NOVN; NYSE:NVS) contributed its chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) drug nilotinib to the initiative...