The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has filed a lawsuit against the United States’ largest pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs), accusing them of inflating insulin prices through a “perverse drug rebate system.” The defendants, CVS Health’s Caremark, Cigna’s Express Scripts, and UnitedHealth Group’s Optum, collectively manage approximately 80% of all prescriptions in the U.S., generating over $400 billion in annual revenue.
According to the Financial Times, the FTC is targeting these PBMs for their role in raising the price of insulin, specifically pointing to Eli Lilly’s Humalog, which saw its wholesale price surge by over 1,200% between 1999 and 2017, eventually costing more than $274. The agency, under the leadership of Chair Lina Khan, is aiming to reduce insurance premiums and wholesale drug prices through its legal action.
Rahul Rao, the FTC’s deputy director of competition, stated, “Caremark, ESI, and Optum—as medication gatekeepers—have extracted millions of dollars off the backs of patients who need life-saving medications.” Per the Financial Times, the lawsuit highlights the growing concern about PBMs’ influence in the pharmaceutical industry, alleging that they prioritize high-priced drugs that offer them larger rebates, to the detriment of consumers.
PBMs act as intermediaries between drug manufacturers and consumers, negotiating discounts on drug prices and taking a portion of these rebates as profits. However, the Financial Times notes that following significant consolidation in the wake of the Affordable Care Act, PBMs are now largely owned by health insurers. This has raised concerns that PBMs favor their own affiliated pharmacies, giving them an unfair advantage and contributing to rising drug prices.
Related: Express Scripts Files Lawsuit Against FTC, Claims Drug Pricing Report Misleading
The FTC alleges that these PBMs have repeatedly selected higher-priced insulin options to increase the rebates and fees they receive. Rao added that the commission’s complaint seeks to end the “exploitative conduct” of these three major PBMs and marks a significant effort to “fix a broken system” that could also impact drug pricing beyond insulin.
In response to the lawsuit, CVS defended itself, calling the FTC’s claims “simply wrong.” Andrea Nelson, Cigna’s chief legal officer, criticized the agency, stating the suit is part of a “troubling pattern” of “unsubstantiated and ideologically-driven attacks” on PBMs. UnitedHealth Group has yet to issue a comment on the matter.
The FTC’s scrutiny isn’t limited to PBMs. According to the Financial Times, the commission is also concerned about the role played by drug manufacturers, such as Eli Lilly, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi, in driving up insulin prices. The FTC noted that PBMs “are not the only potentially culpable actors” in this complex pricing system.
Khan, who has long been vocal about the outsized power of PBMs in the U.S. healthcare landscape, argues that their practices harm both market competition and consumers. The lawsuit against the PBMs arrives just days after Express Scripts filed its own suit against the FTC, challenging a recent study published by the agency that accused PBMs of inflating drug prices at the expense of patients and pharmacies. Express Scripts is demanding a retraction of the report, but the FTC stands by its findings.
Source: The Financial Times
Featured News
Electrolux Fined €44.5 Million in French Antitrust Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Indian Antitrust Body Raids Alcohol Giants Amid Price Collusion Probe
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Attorneys Seek $525 Million in Fees in NCAA Settlement Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Italy’s Competition Watchdog Ends Investigation into Booking.com
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Minnesota Judge Approves $2.4 Million Hormel Settlement in Antitrust Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – CRESSE Insights
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Effective Interoperability in Mobile Ecosystems: EU Competition Law Versus Regulation
Dec 19, 2024 by
Giuseppe Colangelo
The Use of Empirical Evidence in Antitrust: Trends, Challenges, and a Path Forward
Dec 19, 2024 by
Eliana Garces
Some Empirical Evidence on the Role of Presumptions and Evidentiary Standards on Antitrust (Under)Enforcement: Is the EC’s New Communication on Art.102 in the Right Direction?
Dec 19, 2024 by
Yannis Katsoulacos
The EC’s Draft Guidelines on the Application of Article 102 TFEU: An Economic Perspective
Dec 19, 2024 by
Benoit Durand