F

rance’s anti-trust regulator has fined a Johnson & Johnson subsidiary nearly $30 million for running a “smear campaign” to thwart generic competition to its Durogesic painkiller, which is sold as a skin patch.

The fine, announced Wednesday, singles out two actions by the Janssen-Cilag unit of J&J.

Unlock this article by subscribing to STAT Plus today. Try it FREE for 30 days and cancel anytime!

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

What is it?

STAT Plus is a premium subscription that delivers daily market-moving biopharma coverage and in-depth science reporting from a team with decades of industry experience.

What's included?

  • Authoritative biopharma coverage and analysis, interviews with industry pioneers, policy analysis, and first looks at cutting edge laboratories and early stage research
  • Subscriber-only networking events and panel discussions across the country
  • Monthly subscriber-only live chats with our reporters and experts in the field
  • Discounted tickets to industry events and early-bird access to industry reports

Leave a Comment

Please enter your name.
Please enter a comment.

  • Basically J&J is accused of competing by raising issues with the generic form of Durogesic with healthcare professionals. Is what they were saying true? Or in violation of a regulation? These points aren’t mentioned. If so, then there’s a valid case. But if J&J was making truthful points, I fail to see the basis of this complaint.
    Competing and making valid points (assuming they are such) is competition. Because it’s a brand competing with a generic, it’s somehow wrong?
    Seems to me the French complaint is simply about the money.
    I’m not saying all the other anti-competitive examples noted here are OK, but that’s not what I see happening in this situation.

Sign up for our Morning Rounds newsletter

Your daily dose of what’s new in health and medicine.

Privacy Policy