Our six-part investigative series takes an in-depth look into a question often asked by 340B providers: Why can’t they access 340B pricing on one of Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene’s most profitable drug products? We also delve into serious fraud allegations, Congressional oversight, and the possibility of a renewed focus on this contentious area under new leadership at the U.S. Health and Human Services Department. Throughout the series, we also provide BMS/Celgene's viewpoint, their justification for their drug pricing practices, limited distribution policies and why they believe they are following the law.

Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene Myeloma Drugs: Patient-Safety or Profit Motive? Part 6

In Federal, Judicial, Legislative, Pharma Industry, Regulatory, Research/ReportsJune 14, 2021403 Views

Tom Mirga

As we described in Parts 2 and 3 of this series, in 2018, an ex-Celgene vice president responsible for the company’s 340B program compliance alleged in a whistleblower lawsuit that Celgene’s reason for limiting Revlimid, Pomalyst, and Thalomid’s distribution is “to deny access to the drugs at the [340B] ceiling price,” saving the company hundreds of millions of dollars per year.

Please Login or Become a Paid Subscriber to View this Content

If you are already a paid subscriber, please follow the steps below.

Please be sure you’ve completed your one-minute subscription completion form.
I have read and accepted the terms of use and privacy policy.
Log In!

If you are not yet a paid subscriber, please Subscribe now.

For questions about subscriptions or technical assistance, please contact Reshma Eggleston at reshma.eggleston@340breport.com.

Tom Mirga

*Sign up for news summaries and alerts from 340B Report