The French competition authority on Wednesday imposed a record fine of 444 million euros on laboratories Novartis, Roche and Genentech, accused of "
abusive practices
" to "
preserve
" the sales of a drug treating macular degeneration (AMD) at the expense of cheaper competing treatment.
Read also: Generics: Novartis pinned for price agreement
It is the largest collective fine ever pronounced by the authority against pharmaceutical laboratories.
She explains in a press release that “
the Genentech, Novartis and Roche laboratories have implemented a set of behaviors (abuse of collective dominant position) aimed at preserving the position and the price of Lucentis, by curbing the use without authorization for placing on the market (Marketing Authorization) for the anticancer drug Avastin
”.
Prevent a shortfall
Lucentis is a treatment for AMD, an age-related retinal disease, developed by Genentech (which has capital links with the Roche and Novartis groups).
However, doctors found that another drug from Genentech, the anti-cancer drug Avastin, had positive effects on AMD and began to prescribe it despite not having a marketing authorization. market for this disease.
However, Avastin has a cost 30 times lower than Lucentis: an injection of the first costs 30 to 40 euros, against 1,161 euros for the second.
"Given the differences in the cost of treatment between the two specialties
,
any use of Avastin instead of Lucentis was likely to result in a significant loss of earnings for each of the three laboratories concerned", we can read in the press release. the Competition Authority.
Novartis markets Lucentis globally outside of the United States, and Roche markets Avastin.
A sometimes misleading speech
According to the competition authority, Novartis "
sought to thwart the initiatives of ophthalmologists who, within the framework of their freedom of prescription, decided to prescribe Avastin, without marketing authorization, in ophthalmology
".
“
Novartis, Roche and Genentech have also been sanctioned for having implemented a set of blocking behaviors and for having disseminated an alarming, and sometimes misleading, speech to public authorities on the risks associated with the use of Avastin for the treatment of AMD
”.
The authority judges that “
the practices in question are particularly serious, because they intervened in the health sector, where competition is limited, and more specifically, in a context of public debate on the impact on the social finances of the extremely high price of Lucentis
”, reimbursed at 100%.