Canadian company may have overcharged NHS by millions for essential thyroid drug

The NHS had spent more than £34m on Concordia's liothyronine tablets in 2016, which marks an increase from around £600,000 in 2006

Josie Cox
Business Editor
Tuesday 21 November 2017 08:58
Comments

A drugs firm may have overcharged the NHS by millions of pounds for an essential thyroid drug, the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority has said.

The CMA on Tuesday said that it had investigated Canadian company Concordia and found that in 2016, the NHS had spent more than £34m on liothyronine tablets, which marks an increase from around £600,000 in 2006.

The amount it paid per pack of the pills rose from around £4.46 before the drug was de-branded in 2007, to £258.19 by July 2017, the CMA said – an increase of almost 6,000 per cent. Production costs during that time remained broadly stable.

Liothyronine tablets are mainly used to treat hypothyroidism, which is a condition caused by a deficiency of thyroid hormone. It affect at least two in every 100 people and can lead to depression, tiredness and weight gain, the CMA said.

Although liothyronine tablets are not the primary treatment for hypothyroidism, for many patients there is no suitable alternative. Until earlier this year, Concordia was the only supplier of the drug.

“Pharmaceutical companies which abuse their position and overcharge for drugs are forcing the NHS – and the UK taxpayer – to pay over the odds for important medical treatments,” said CMA Chief Executive, Andrea Coscelli. “We allege that Concordia used its market dominance in the supply of liothyronine tablets to do exactly that.”

Mr Coscelli said that, at this stage of the investigation, the CMA’s findings are provisional and there has been no definitive decision on whether there had been a breach of competition law. “We will carefully consider any representations from the companies before deciding whether the law has in fact been broken,” he said.

Commenting on the CMA’s report, Concordia said in a statement that it did not believe that competition law had been infringed.

“The pricing of liothyronine has been conducted openly and transparently with the Department of Health in the UK over a period of 10 years. Over that time, significant investment has been made in this medicine to ensure its continued availability for patients in the UK, to the specifications required by the medicines and healthcare products regulatory agency in the UK,” it said.

It added that it was working “cooperatively” with the CMA as it proceeds with its investigations.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Please enter a valid email
Please enter a valid email
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Please enter your first name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
Please enter your last name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
You must be over 18 years old to register
You must be over 18 years old to register
Opt-out-policy
You can opt-out at any time by signing in to your account to manage your preferences. Each email has a link to unsubscribe.

By clicking ‘Create my account’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Join our new commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in