SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
novartis
Despite Profit Surge, Novartis Still Suing to Prevent Lower Drug Prices
"Novartis seeing its profits double serves as another reminder that Big Pharma can afford to negotiate more reasonable prices for seniors."
Oct 29, 2024
As Novartis released its third-quarter financial report on Tuesday, one watchdog pointed out that the Swiss pharmaceutical giant's profits have jumped from the same period last year but it is still suing over a 2022 law that cut prescription drug prices.
"Novartis seeing its profits double serves as another reminder that Big Pharma can afford to negotiate more reasonable prices for seniors," Accountable.US executive director Tony Carrk said in a statement responding to the company's financial report.
Several drug companies are challenging drug price policies from the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), which enabled Medicare negotiations with Big Pharma to cut the costs of some widely used medications. A federal judge rejected Novartis' suit on October 18—the eighth such legal victory for patients—but the company has already filed an appeal.
Novartis said that its "momentum in Q3" is thanks to "sales growth driven by continued strong performance" from psoriasis drug Cosentyx, heart failure treatment Entresto, multiple sclerosis treatment Kesimpta, breast cancer drug Kisqali, high cholesterol treatment Leqvio, and prostate cancer drug Pluvicto.
As Euronewsreported Tuesday:
Sales of the flagship prostate cancer drug, Pluvicto, increased by 50%. It is based on new so-called radioligand therapy which is a form of targeted nuclear medicine used to treat multiple types of cancer and has a booming market in the U.S.
The drug is now on the market in several E.U. countries, however, its price (around $42,500 in the U.S., which translates to just under €40,000) leaves some uncertainty over whether health systems in Europe will be able to afford it.
Meanwhile, Entresto was among the 10 medications included in the first round of Medicare negotiations. Accountable.US noted Tuesday that it "is among the most expensive prescriptions for Medicare patients. Under the new program, the drug is now priced at $295 per 30-day supply, translating to $333 in savings per prescription."
Cutting drug costs has been a priority for U.S. President Joe Biden, who signed the IRA, and Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic nominee facing former Republican President Donald Trump in the November 5 election.
"After years of big drug companies prioritizing profits over patients' health, the Biden-Harris drug negotiation program is working to put seniors' needs and pocketbooks first," said Accountable.US' Carrk.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced last week that "nearly 1.5 million people with Medicare Part D saved nearly $1 billion in out-of-pocket prescription drugs costs in the first half of 2024" because of the 2022 law.
"All Americans should be able to access the healthcare they need—no matter their income," Harris said last week in response to the HHS data on seniors' savings. "That is why our administration fought to lower healthcare costs with the Inflation Reduction Act, legislation that I was proud to cast the tie-breaking vote on in the Senate."
"We have been able to cut prescription drug costs, cap the cost of insulin at $35 a month for seniors, and lower premiums for those on Medicare," Harris highlighted. "Our administration has also reached unprecedented agreements with pharmaceutical companies to lower prices for the first 10 drugs selected for the Medicare price negotiation program—10 of the most widely used and expensive drugs that treat conditions ranging from cancer to diabetes. And there is still much more to come."
"I have seen the impact of fighting to protect patients up close. As attorney general, I held Big Pharma accountable for their deceptive and illegal practices—winning settlements that amounted to more than $7 billion against pharmaceutical companies for their unsafe and unfair tactics," she continued, referring to her former role in California. "I will never stop fighting for the health, well-being, and financial stability of the American people."
Harris has campaigned on accelerating Medicare negotiations and expanding the health program for seniors—though doing so would likely require her party to also win both chambers of Congress in next week's election.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Big Pharma Using India's Poor as 'Lab Rats' to Test Meds
Multinationals outsource testing, unbeknownst to Indian patients
Jul 11, 2013
Multinational pharmaceutical companies are treating patients in India like "lab rats," distributing untested drugs for research purposes without the patients' informed consent,Agency France-Presse highlighted on Thursday in a report pulling from personal accounts.
The issue is ongoing and widespread and has been subject to a Supreme Court Case in India -- which led Supreme Court judges R.M. Lodha and A.S. Dave to state, "There has to be some sense of responsibility. Human beings are treated like guinea pigs."
Pharmaceutical companies often go to India where the rules are less strict and the testing procedures subsequently far less costly.
"In Europe and the United States the laws are pretty strict. India, on the other hand, makes for a less restrictive destination for drug trials because the regulator lacks teeth," said health campaigner Amulya Nidhi, who works for the Swasthya Adhikaar Manch group, which is fighting on behalf of many of the pharmaceutical trial victims.
As a result, "many desperate and poor people in India are unwittingly taking part in clinical trials for drugs by Indian and multinational pharmaceutical companies that outsource the work to unregulated research organizations," AFP reports.
Such was the case with Niranjan Lal Pathak, the center of the AFP article, who was offered free treatment for a heart complaint at his local hospital. The medicine, unbeknownst to him, turned out to be an untested drug called Atopaxar, developed by Japan-based pharmaceutical company Eisai for anxiety disorders. Pathak was the victim of a drug trial without his informed consent.
His family says that Pathak is now suffering from extreme dementia--a side effect of the drug.
"He barely recognizes us. His life is finished and so are our hopes to see him healthy and happy again," a family member told AFP.
"The label on the medicines often does not specify that it is meant for trial, and vulnerable people end up being used as lab rats," said Nidhi.
The problem is rampant, according to AFP, while India's lawmakers are currently mulling over amendments to the Drugs and Cosmetics Act that would place the responsibility on companies that are supposed to oversee the trials. However, no time-frame has been given to pass the act.
Recent reporting by The Times of India showed that up to 2,600 "human guinea pigs" have died in the past seven years during drug trials by foreign pharmaceutical corporations.
According to the paper, trials of 475 drugs took place during that time but only 17 of them were actually approved for marketing in India.
Clinical trials of two drugs--Bayer's Rivaroxaban and Novartis's Aliskiren vs. Enalapril--accounted for the most deaths and were repeatedly used despite widespread fatalities.
In 2011, Al Jazeeradocumented this growing trend over the last decade, showing US pharmaceutical companies who have moved their testing operations overseas to cut costs. The "costs," however, are externalized on low-income patients around the world--with deadly results. Watch below:
Outsourced: Clinical trials overseas | Fault LinesUS pharmaceutical firms have moved their operations overseas over the past decade. An increasing number of tests are being ...
Keep ReadingShow Less
Human Rights Win as Big Pharma 'Novartis' Loses Patent Case
India's Supreme Court rejects plea from Swiss pharmaceutical giant, paving way for more affordable, generic medicines worldwide
Apr 01, 2013
India's Supreme Court dealt Big Pharma giant Novartis a blow on Monday with a landmark ruling that campaigners say marks a victory for "people over profit," and will make potentially life-saving drugs far more accessible worldwide.
The court ruled against the Swiss pharmaceutical corporation in its years-long challenge to patent a newer version of its cancer drug Glivec, saying the new version wasn't a new medicine, thus allowing generic versions of the drug to be manufactured.
Critics have referred to corporations' practice of getting a 20-year patent on a drug and then making minor changes to it and re-patenting it as "evergreening," and derided it for preventing the manufacture of cheaper, generic versions of the drug.
Providing some background is the Guardian's health editor, Sarah Boseley, who writes that multinational drug companies
with support from the US and European governments which want a profitable drug industry, have worked to tighten patent protection for new drugs through national laws and trade agreements. India has been the main focus in its historical role as the pharmacy of the developing world.
Under the World Trade Organisation's trade-related intellectual property rights (Trips) rules, India agreed to bring in patents for drugs in 2005. Drugs without patent protection before that date can still be copied and sold cheaply to developing countries by generics companies.
Novartis began seeking patent protection for its cancer drug Glivec as soon as the law came into force, but as the drug was already on the market the Swiss firm could not make a standard application. Instead, it sought a patent for a slightly altered version that it said was easier for patients to absorb. Novartis argued that this was innovation under Indian law and deserving of a patent.
But India included in its laws a safeguard clause known as Section 3(d) to prevent abuse of patents, humanitarian organization Doctors Without Borders (MSF) explained, and hailed Monday's ruling as "a major victory for patients' access to affordable medicines in developing countries."
"Novartis's attacks on 3(d), one the elements of India's patent law that protect public health, have failed," Leena Menghaney, India Manager for MSF's Access Campaign, said in a statement. "Patent offices in India should consider this a clear signal that the law should be strictly applied, and frivolous patent applications should be rejected."
Dr. Unni Karunakara, MSF's international president, added that the decision "now makes patents on the medicines that we desperately need less likely. This marks the strongest possible signal to Novartis and other multinational pharmaceutical companies that they should stop seeking to attack the Indian patent law."
But the effects of the ruling spread beyond India, Boseley noted:
At stake in the legal battle was not just the right of generic companies to make cheap drugs for India once original patents expire but also access to newer drugs for poorer countries in much of Africa and Asia. India has long been known as the pharmacy of the developing world.
The Cancer Patients Aid Association in India (CPAA) also celebrating the ruling, stating, "We are very happy that the court has recognized the right of patients to access affordable medicines over profits for big pharmaceutical companies through patents. Our access to affordable treatment will not be possible if the medicines are patented. It is a huge victory for human rights," the Guardian reports.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular