This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
In the case of Novartis’ antihypertensive drug Exforge (amlodipine and valsartan), retail pharmacies including CVS, Walgreens, and two other plaintiff groups accused Novartis and Endo International’s Par Pharmaceutical unit of forming an illegal “reverse payment” agreement to delay the launch of less expensive generic versions of the drug.
The FDA granted full approval to Par’s generic on 28 March, 2013. Plaintiffs – in this case direct purchasers, indirect purchasers and retailers including CVS Health, Kroger, Rite Aid and Walgreens Boots Alliance according to Reuters – filed suit against Novartis and Par in 2018 alleging violation of federal antitrust laws.
They've been involved in major clinical studies; they've been working with the FDA as consultants. Then if it that's going to be the case, you're going to sit there for the FDA approval. So not only M&As, the tech, the retail, the pharma that are buying. Because guess what? It's not always going to happen.
The Attorney General of Alabama has threatened to use an obscure law passed in 2006 to prosecute women who terminate a pregnancy using pharmacological means, shortly after the FDA made access to the drugs easier.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 8,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content