A federal judge has declined to dismiss claims that Johnson & Johnson is unfairly suppressing competition of its anti-inflammatory drug Remicade.

U.S. District Judge J. Curtis Joyner of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on Aug. 10 declined to grant J&J's motion to dismiss the lawsuit Pfizer v. Johnson & Johnson. The ruling allows Pfizer to proceed with the antitrust lawsuit it brought against J&J on allegations that rebate programs J&J entered into with insurers and hospitals were designed to curb competition with Pfizer's biosimilar anti-inflammatory medication called Inflectra.

Although J&J contended that Pfizer failed to sufficiently raise a claim, or show that customers were hurt by rising prices, Joyner said Pfizer presented enough issues to allow the case to proceed.

“Discovery will reveal whether Pfizer has offered more competitive pricing for Inflectra, as alleged in the complaint. If Pfizer's claims about pricing prove true, then the pricing data may indicate that J&J's conduct has prevented Pfizer from competing in violation of the antitrust laws,” Joyner said. “Ultimately, the legality of J&J's conduct will depend on whether it foreclosed a substantial share of the market such that competition has been harmed.”

In a statement to the press, Pfizer spokeswoman Sally Beatty said the company was pleased with the ruling.

“Pfizer believes that this anti-competitive conduct cannot continue if we want to have a vibrant biosimilar market in the United States,” Beatty said.

A spokeswoman for J&J, however, countered in an emailed statement that Pfizer's suit was “without merit.”

“We stand by our contracts and will continue competing on value and price to help ensure patients have affordable access to Remicade,” spokeswoman Megan Farina said. “In contracting for Remicade, payers and providers have demanded, and we have provided aggressive discounts. Since we are competing vigorously, health care system costs will go down.”

According to Joyner, J&J first introduced Remicade in 1999 to treat arthritis, psoriasis, ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease. The drug, Joyner said, is a biologic drug, which means it is derived from living systems, rather than chemically synthesized, so its structure is not as easily identified or characterized. He noted that J&J's patent on the drug gave it a monopoly until 2016.

Pfizer introduced Inflectra, the first biosimilar drug to Remicade, in 2016; however, according to Pfizer, soon after its release, J&J deployed its “biosimilar readiness plan,” which included using exclusionary contracts with insurers and hospitals that blocked Pfizer's access to “an overwhelming share of consumers.”

Pfizer alleged that the contracts contained agreements that excluded biosimilar drugs from the policies, and required patients to try using Remicade first before the carrier would cover Inflectra.

Pfizer also contended that J&J created a “rebate trap” in its exclusive contracts, which would have provided rebates to all current and future users. Pfizer argued that, since users already on the drug are unlikely to switch to Inflectra regardless of price, applying the rebate to both current and future users made it so insurance companies would suffer significant cost increases if they did not qualify for the rebate. Pfizer also contended that J&J “bundled” its rebate program with other less competitive drugs.

Pfizer contended that, as a result of the anti-competitive behavior, it was unable to compete with at least 70 percent of the market. The company also noted that the price for Remicade increased nearly 10 percent since the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved Inflectra.

J&J, in its motion to dismiss, countered that providers lacked “comfort and awareness” of Inflectra and that the drug was not viewed as being necessarily interchangeable with Remicade. Pfizer's inability to gain market share, J&J contended, was not due to any perceived anti-competitive conduct.

Joyner, however, said that, at this stage in the litigation, “The existence of possible alternative causes of an antitrust injury is not a valid ground for dismissal.”

Robert Milne of White & Case is representing Pfizer, and Adeel Mangi of Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler is representing J&J.

Read the complaint here: