
South Africa’s Competition Commission has launched an investigation into pharmaceutical giants Novo Nordisk A/S and Sanofi over potential anti-competitive practices in the human insulin pen market. The inquiry aims to determine whether the companies are using multiple device patents and proprietary designs to stifle competition and block alternative suppliers, according to Bloomberg.
The commission is engaging with the local subsidiaries of both drugmakers as part of its initial probe, with further investigation expected to delve into the companies’ business strategies. The focus is on whether the two companies’ practices limit the entry of more affordable options into the South African market, per Bloomberg.
Novo Nordisk, the Danish drugmaker, expressed its willingness to cooperate with authorities. In an emailed statement, the company affirmed that it adheres to all relevant laws and “strongly supports a competitive market.” Novo Nordisk decided not to bid for South Africa’s 2024 public tender for human insulin pens, instead opting to phase out the easier-to-use pens and offer an older vial-based insulin product, which requires patients to administer the drug via syringe. The company stated that the decision followed “thorough discussion” with the South African Department of Health and ensured sufficient insulin access through this method.
Related: FTC Seeks Delay in PBM Case Over Alleged Insulin Price Gouging
Diabetes remains a significant health issue in South Africa, ranking as the leading underlying cause of death among women and straining public healthcare facilities. The discontinuation of insulin pens sparked protests last year, with hundreds marching to Novo Nordisk’s Johannesburg headquarters to demand greater access to human insulin and lower prices.
Meanwhile, Sanofi, which also opted out of the government’s tender to supply insulin pens, left the government to procure a limited number of insulin analogue pens at a higher price, according to Doctors Without Borders (MSF). Insulin analogue pens, which offer adjustable absorption rates, are generally more expensive than human insulin. MSF criticized the lack of bulk supply agreements, which could have provided broader access to the medication.
The Competition Commission’s investigation will assess whether the drugmakers’ actions contributed to inflated prices and restricted access to life-saving medication in a country already grappling with a high diabetes burden.
Source: Bloomberg
Featured News
Trump Fires Two Democratic FTC Members, Raising Questions Over Regulatory Independence
Mar 19, 2025 by
CPI
Spain’s BBVA Remains Optimistic About Hostile Takeover of Sabadell
Mar 18, 2025 by
CPI
BlackRock, Vanguard and State Street Seek Dismissal of Texas Antitrust Lawsuit
Mar 18, 2025 by
CPI
EU to Boost Metal Sectors with Energy Relief and Safeguards
Mar 18, 2025 by
CPI
Players’ Association Sues Tennis Governing Bodies Over Alleged Antitrust Violations
Mar 18, 2025 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Self-Preferencing
Feb 26, 2025 by
CPI
Platform Self-Preferencing: Focusing the Policy Debate
Feb 26, 2025 by
Michael Katz
Weaponized Opacity: Self-Preferencing in Digital Audience Measurement
Feb 26, 2025 by
Thomas Hoppner & Philipp Westerhoff
Self-Preferencing: An Economic Literature-Based Assessment Advocating a Case-By-Case Approach and Compliance Requirements
Feb 26, 2025 by
Patrice Bougette & Frederic Marty
Self-Preferencing in Adjacent Markets
Feb 26, 2025 by
Muxin Li