Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota has filed suit against Vyera Pharmaceuticals, alleging that the drugmaker engaged in illegal pricing practices for its drug Daraprim.
In the suit, filed Thursday, the insurer says Vyera intentionally monopolized the market so it could increase prices on Daraprim—a drug used to treat infections in immunocompromised patients such as those with HIV—by more than 4,000%.
The suit names Vyera, which was formerly Turing Pharmaceuticals, alongside its parent company Phoenixus AG.
It also names former executives Kevin Mulleady and Martin Shkreli, who was dubbed the "pharma bro" by some in the media after rising in notoriety for acquiring Daraprim and increasing the price in 2015.
Blue Cross says Vyera then prevented generic drug companies from obtaining samples and the ingredients needed to develop lower-cost alternatives.
Daraprim is the leading therapy for treating toxoplasmosis, a parasitic infection that can be fatal for people who are immunocompromised. Under Vyera, the per-pill price for Daraprim increased from $17.59 to $750, Blue Cross said.
RELATED: Humana files suit against generic drug makers, alleges price fixing
Patients who take Daraprim typically require multiple doses per day, and the course of treatment can take weeks or months, the insurer said.
“Everyone deserves access to safe, effective, and affordable medication,” said Craig Samitt, M.D., president and CEO at Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota, in a statement. “This lawsuit is an important step in advancing that goal. Drug companies need to be held accountable for their role in making sure health care costs are sustainable for all.”
We've reached out to Vyera and will update when we hear back.
In the suit, Blue Cross claims that the company and those executives specifically targeted Daraprim due to its relatively small patient population and the ease with which they could control the market.
From the time Vyera obtained the rights to Daraprim in 2015 until a generic option was made available in March 2020, the company controlled 100% of the market, according to the suit.
The insurer is seeking damages based on the alleged overcharges.