POZ - Treatment News : New Developments in Abbott’s Norvir Court Case

POZ - Health, Life and HIV
Subscribe to:
POZ magazine
E-newsletters
Join POZ: Facebook MySpace Twitter Pinterest
Tumblr Google+ Flickr MySpace
POZ Personals
Sign In / Join
Username:
Password:

Back to home » Treatment News » May 2008

What's That Mean?
(just double-click it!)

NEW! If you don't understand one of the words in this article, just double-click it. A window will open with a definition from mondofacto's On-line Medical Dictionary. If the double-click feature doesn't work in your browser, you can enter the word below:


Most Popular Lessons

The HIV Life Cycle

Shingles

Herpes Simplex Virus

Syphilis & Neurosyphilis

Treatments for Opportunistic Infections (OIs)

What is AIDS & HIV?

Hepatitis & HIV

15 Years Ago In POZ


More Treatment News

Click here for more news

Have news about HIV? Send press releases, news tips and other announcements to news@poz.com.


email print

May 15, 2008

New Developments in Abbott’s Norvir Court Case

Documents involved in a class-action lawsuit against Abbott Laboratories, over a 400 percent price increase of its protease inhibitor (PI) Norvir (ritonavir) in 2003, have been unsealed, according to an announcement by Prescription Access Litigation (PAL), a coalition of 130 health-advocacy groups. One of the unsealed documents, made publicly available on PAL’s website, reveals that Abbott considered withdrawing Norvir capsules from the market in an effort to protect market share for its other PI, Kaletra (ritonavir/lopinavir).

Full-dose Norvir was once a popular cornerstone of antiretroviral (ARV) therapy. It eventually became used less frequently because of its significant side-effect profile and the fact that it causes the blood levels of many other drugs to increase to toxic levels. This tendency for extensive drug interactions turned out to be a boon for other HIV drugs, however, and it soon became standard-of-care to use low doses of Norvir to boost other PIs. Abbott took advantage of this quality by bundling a low dose of Norvir along with the PI lopinavir, selling them in a single pill as Kaletra.

In December 2003, Abbott raised the wholesale price of Norvir by 400 percent. At the time, the company said that this was because Norvir was now being used most commonly at very low doses and Abbott needed to be able to recover its investments in research and development for Norvir and future HIV drugs. In October 2004, however, a PAL member group, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Health and Welfare fund, filed a suit against Abbott in northern California, claiming that the company was trying to monopolize the HIV marketplace. The SEIU pointed out that when Abbott raised the price of Norvir, it did not raise the price of Kaletra, which also contains the drug. This meant the total price of a regimen containing Kaletra stayed the same, while Norvir-boosted regimens using competitor PIs suddenly became much more expensive. The SEIU claims that this constitutes an unfair and illegal business practice designed to stifle competition against Kaletra.

Motions filed by Abbott to dismiss the suit or issue summary judgments have been denied thus far. In June 2007, the lawsuit became a class-action lawsuit allowing others plaintiffs to join the suit. The trial is scheduled to go forward in August 2008.

This past month, the court ordered the unsealing of a number of documents that pertained to the lawsuit, overruling Abbott’s objections that the documents contained proprietary information about “business strategies.”

The documents reveal several strategies considered in 2003, including making Norvir available only in its liquid formulation (despite the fact that an Abbott executive stated in his deposition that the liquid formulation of Norvir tastes like “someone else’s vomit”). Another strategy under consideration was to remove Norvir from the market altogether, essentially forcing most people wishing to use a PI to take Kaletra instead of other PIs.

PAL director Alex Sugerman-Brozan says, “These documents show that Abbott put profits ahead of the needs of seriously ill HIV/AIDS patients in quintupling Norvir’s price.”

To view background information on the court case and the unsealed court documents, click here.

Search: Norvir, ritonavir, Abbott, Kaletra, lopinavir, Prescription Access Litigation, PAL, Service Employers International Union, SEIU, lawsuit, court, unsealed


Scroll down to comment on this story.

email print

Name:

(will display; 2-50 characters)

Email:

(will NOT display)

City:

(will display; optional)

Comment (500 characters left):

(Note: The POZ team reviews all comments before they are posted. Please do not include either ":" or "@" in your comment. The opinions expressed by people providing comments are theirs alone. They do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Smart + Strong, which is not responsible for the accuracy of any of the information supplied by people providing comments.)

| Posting Rules

Previous Comments:

         


[Go to top]


Join POZ Facebook Twitter Google+ MySpace YouTube Tumblr Flickr
Quick Links
Current Issue

HIV 101
HIV Testing
Safer Sex
Find a Date
Newly Diagnosed
Disclosing Your Status
POZ TV
Read the Blogs
Visit the Forums
Women
African American
Latino
Providers
Job Listings
Events Calendar
Starting Treatment
Quilt in the Capital
POZ Army


    dulce_angelita
    Bronx
    New York


    TanyaB
    Delray Beach
    Florida


    sefarady
    Los Angeles
    California


    Fergie911
    Chicago
    Illinois
Click here to join POZ Personals!
Talk to Us
Poll
Do you support rapid in-home HIV testing?
Yes
No

Survey
Health 2.0

more surveys
Contact Us
We welcome your comments!
[ about Smart + Strong | about POZ | POZ advisory board | partner links | advertising policy | advertise/contact us | site map]
© 2012 Smart + Strong. All Rights Reserved. Terms of use and Your privacy.
Smart + Strong® is a registered trademark of CDM Publishing, LLC.