Rival's lawsuit could delay launch of new Lilly insulin

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Eli Lilly and Co. may have to wait an extra year or more to launch a once-a-day insulin for diabetics after a rival drugmaker said Lilly’s plans violate the patents it holds on the drug Lantus.

Paris-based Sanofi sued Lilly on Thursday in federal court in Delaware. That suit triggers an automatic 30-month delay on Lilly’s plans to launch a similar version of Lantus—unless Lilly can win in court before that time.

Indianapolis-based Lilly had planned to launch its generic-like version of Lantus—which is known as insulin glargine—next year after Lantus’ patents expire on Feb. 12, 2015.

Sanofi, in a statement, said it decided to sue after a Lilly regulatory filing in December challenged the validity of six of the seven patents Sanofi holds on Lantus.

Lantus currently generates $7 billion a year in sales, making it one of the best-selling drugs in the world. Lilly’s failure to launch a similar drug—even 14 years after Lantus hit the market—has been a financial hindrance and an embarrassment to Lilly, which pioneered the first insulin in the 1920s.

Lilly sells insulins that must be taken multiple times per day, but diabetic patients prefer to limit the number of injections they must take, giving the once-a-day Lantus an edge. Lilly rival Novo Nordisk A/S launched its once-a-day insulin, called Levemir, in 2005.

Lilly filed for market approval of its insulin glargine from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration using a regulatory pathway that allows it to refer to the safety and efficacy studies conducted for Lantus, as well as submitting some of its own clinical trial data of its drug. Lilly’s insulin glargine would be a “biosimilar” version of Lantus.

"Lilly respects the intellectual property of others and does not believe the application for approval of its new insulin glargine product infringes any valid claim of the asserted patents," said Doug Norman, Lilly’s general patent counsel, in a prepared statement.

According to a report by Reuters, a research analyst recently said that a 30-month delay would raise Sanofi's earnings per share from 2015 through 2020 by about 6 percent and lower Lilly's earnings per share for the period by about 2 percent.

A delay in the launch of a cheaper, generic-like version of Lantus would also give Sanofi more time, Reuters noted, to switch patients to a new and yet-to-be-approved long-acting drug known as U300.


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. If what you stated is true, then this article is entirely inaccurate. "State sells bonds" is same as "State borrows money". Supposedly the company will "pay for them". But since we are paying the company, we are still paying for this road with borrowed money, even though the state has $2 billion in the bank.

  2. Andrew hit the nail on the head. AMTRAK provides terrible service and that is why the state has found a contractor to improve the service. More trips, on-time performance, better times, cleanliness and adequate or better restrooms. WI-FI and food service will also be provided. Transit from outlying areas will also be provided. I wouldn't take it the way it is but with the above services and marketing of the service,ridership will improve and more folks will explore Indy and may even want to move here.

  3. They could take the property using eminent domain and save money by not paying the church or building a soccer field and a new driveway. Ctrwd has monthly meetings open to all customers of the district. The meetings are listed and if the customers really cared that much they would show. Ctrwd works hard in every way they can to make sure the customer is put first. Overflows damage the surrounding environment and cost a lot of money every year. There have been many upgrades done through the years to help not send flow to Carmel. Even with the upgrades ctrwd cannot always keep up. I understand how a storage tank could be an eye sore, but has anyone thought to look at other lift stations or storage tanks. Most lift stations are right in the middle of neighborhoods. Some close to schools and soccer fields, and some right in back yards, or at least next to a back yard. We all have to work together to come up with a proper solution. The proposed solution by ctrwd is the best one offered so far.

  4. Fox has comments from several people that seem to have some inside information. I would refer to their website. Changed my whole opionion of this story.

  5. This place is great! I'm piggy backing and saying the Cobb salad is great. But the ribs are awesome. $6.49 for ribs and 2 sides?! They're delicious. If you work downtown, head over there.