Free Essay

Merck and Vioxx Drug Recall

In: Business and Management

Submitted By phread
Words 1294
Pages 6
Case Study: Merck and the Vioxx Recall

Kelvin Gabel

Benedictine University

Case Study: Merck and the Vioxx Recall

According to Lawrence and Weber (2014), former Merck CEO George W. Merck implied a corporate vision of social responsibility for Merck & Co., Inc. (Merck) when he stated in 1950 that medicine was for the people and that loyalty to that concept would lead to greater profits. On the surface, it appears Merck has historically lived its declared mission of putting people first. This is demonstrated by the company forfeiting patent and profits from the antibiotic streptomycin and the drug Mectizan (Lawrence, 2014). Merck was well rewarded for its people first philosophy. Though it was ranked fifth in asset and market value, it ranked first in profits. Additionally the company had a stellar reputation of being perceived as the most ethical and socially responsible of the major drug companies (Lawrence, 2014). Today Merck Pharmaceutical’s mission statement is “to discover, develop and provide innovative products and services that save and improve lives around the world (Merck, 2015).” Reading Merck’s current mission statement lacks both the compassion of placing people first and the implied social responsibility of Mr. Merck’s statement in 1950. To be contextually correct historically in forming a view of Merck and the Vioxx recall issue, I sought to find a corporate mission statement from the period of the recall which was in 2006. According to Culp, David R. and Berry, Isobel (2007) Merck’s mission and values statement stressed that its "business is preserving and improving human life." It continued "[w]e value, above all, the ability to serve everyone who can benefit from the appropriate use of our products and services." In the context of Merck’s 2006 mission statement, Merck did not act in a socially responsible or in an ethical manner in regards to its development, marketing, and recall of Vioxx. The process of gaining FDA approval is murky and highly subjective, entirely dependent on how one views free trade, public health, and government oversight. The smoking gun to suggest Merck was aggressively marketing Vioxx for profit is demonstrated best by the amount of money the company spent in the drugs marketing. According to Lawrence (2014) Merck spent $422 million in 2003 to market Vioxx to doctors and hospitals. In 2004, out of $4 billion spent by the pharmaceutical industry for direct-to-consumer (DTC) advertising of all drugs, Merck alone spent $500 million on Vioxx advertising alone. This advertising was profitable; it resulted in $4.25 of revenue for every advertising dollar spent. Beyond the money being spent to market Vioxx, there are other ethical regards to consider in Merck’s marketing of Vioxx. The first is that Merck had an internal training manual for sales representatives which explained how the representatives were to “dodge” questions physicians may have had concerning any associations Vioxx may have with cardiovascular effects the drug may have on patients (Lawrence, 2014). The other is ethical consideration is the direct-to-consumer marketing. Such marketing creates a demand for a drug while sending a message that drugs are safe and there is not a need for a physician to determine its appropriateness of safety for a specific patient (Lawrence, 2014). As evident above, Merck spent a substantial amount of money to market Vioxx and create a consumer demand. In terms of developing Vioxx, internal Merck emails and documents suggest lead one to believe Vioxx was suspect of cardiovascular involvement from the beginning. In light of such concerns, which were expressed by Merck scientists during the drugs development phase (Lawrence, 2014), Merck should have voluntarily pursued additional or ongoing research if they were following the corporate mission at the time: "business is preserving and improving human life” (Culp, 2007). In fact a post-market study code-named VIGOR highly suggested that patients who took Vioxx had a five-times more likely chance of a cardiovascular event than patients on an alternative medicine (Lawrence, 2014). In a later study of patients in the Kaiser health maintenance organization found that Vioxx patients had three times the rate of heart attacks as patients on a competing drug. Merck’s response was that retrospective studies are inaccurate and do not control potentially significant variables that may contribute to the higher incidences of heart attacks (Lawrence, 2014). It was only when the results of the APPROVe study demonstrated the potential hazards of Vioxx did Merck remove the drug from the market. Merck was overly aggressive in marketing Vioxx to physicians and patients early in its release, despite concerns of cardiovascular involvement. When these suspicions were known in 2000, the year the VIGOR study was completed, Merck not only negotiated with the FDA over the level and wording of a drug warning (Lawrence, 2014), but it escalated its spending in marketing. Perhaps Merck’s concern for improving human life with its products and medications would have been demonstrated if a Black Box warning (FDA, 2012) would have been attached to the drug rather than an FDA negotiated label warning at the time of the drugs release. Concern would have even been demonstrated if done in 2000 when the results of the VIGOR study were known. These actions demonstrate a disregard for patient safety for corporate revenue and profit.
Personally, I feel the current system of monitoring drug safety is adequate. A market system provides a balance of powers where profit and public interest are mostly protected. Having worked as a medical mission volunteer in Vietnam and Peru, I witness first-hand the disadvantages of an overly-regulated healthcare system. In the white paper A Call to Action: Protecting U.S. Citizens from Inappropriate Medication Use, the Institute for Safe Medication Practice states that over half of prescriptions taken are used improperly and that 96% percent of patients do not ask for proper drug use instructions. DTC advertising is a leading form of marketing of drugs by pharmaceutical companies (Lawrence, 2014; ISMP, 2007) and such advertising may lead to inappropriate or excessive medication use. This is a result of the patient perceiving a need for a drug and a physician’s prescribing the drug based on the patient’s demand, even when the drug may not be clinically indicated (ISMP, 2007). ISMP (2007) advocates for pharmacists to be assume the responsibility for medication management by expanding the role of the pharmacist from dispenser of the drugs to managers and providers of patient drug education. It is there stance that streamlined and appropriately focused patient education will help prevent medication misuse, reduce costs, and overall improve the population health. To implement a pharmacist drug education initiative Congress, healthcare policy-makers, employers, insurers, and the public need to ensure that sufficient and adequate funding is in provided for pharmacists to offer medication therapy management and drug reviews to patients and families nation-wide in the United States.

References
Culp, David R. and Berry, Isobel (Summer, 2007). Merck and the Vioxx Debacle: Deadly
Loyalty. Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development, 22(1), 1-34. Retrieved from http://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/jcred/vol22/iss1/1.
Food and Drug Administration (FDA). (2012, November). A Guide to Drug Safety Terms at
FDA. Retrieved October 17, 2015, from http://www.fda.gov/downloads/ForConsumers/ ConsumerUpdates/UCM107976.pdf
Institute for Safe Medication Practices (ISMP). (2007). A Call to Action: Protecting U.S.
Citizens from Inappropriate Medication Use. Retrieved October 17, 2015, from https://www.ismp.org/pressroom/viewpoints/CommunityPharmacy.pdf
Lawrence, A.T., Weber, J. (2014). Cases in Business and Society. T. Hauger (Ed.), Business and Society: Stakeholders, Ethics, Public Policy (14th ed., pp. 493-502). New York, United States: McGraw-Hill. (Original work published 2005).
Merck &Co, Inc. (2015). Mission Statement. Retrieved October 17, 2015, from http://www.merck.com/about/home.html

Similar Documents

Premium Essay

Merck, the Fda, and the Vioxx Recall

...Do you believe that Merck acted in a socially responsible and ethical manner with regard to Vioxx? Why or why not? In your answer, please address the company’s drug development and testing, marketing and advertising, relationships with government regulators and policymakers, and handling of the recall. No, Merck didn’t act in a corporate social responsibility in regards to Vioxx. Corporate social responsibility means that a corporation should act in a way that enhances society and its inhabitants and be held accountable for any of its actions that affect people, their communities, and their environment. Over a five year period from 1999 to 2004 over 139,000 people in the United States has had a heart attack or stroke as a result of taking Vioxx about 55,000 of them died. When a business is ranked on being highly successful they are mostly being ranked on profit not the amount of people they helped or cured. The pharmaceutical giant Merck that manufactured Vioxx was ranked number three of the world’s top pharmaceutical companies with sales of $30.78 billion dollars and profits of $7.8 billion. In the eight-page letter, the FDA says Merck engaged "in a promotional campaign for Vioxx that minimizes the potentially serious cardiovascular findings that were observed" in a clinical trial comparing Vioxx to naproxen, a less-expensive painkiller. "Your promotional campaign discounts the fact" that in the trial, "patients on Vioxx were observed to have a four to five-fold......

Words: 1129 - Pages: 5

Free Essay

Vioxx Decisions

...Vioxx Decisions – Were They Ethical? In the late 1990s, a pharmaceutical company called Merck was a leader in this industry. The pharmaceutical industry required millions of dollars and great amounts of time to be invested in research and development. From 1995 to 2001, Merck was successful in releasing 13 major drugs into the market. One of these drugs was one that would treat rheumatoid arthritis. The drug, Vioxx, acquired the approval of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in May 2009 (Cavusgil, 2007). Vioxx became one of the top five selling drugs in the market in the next five years. However, Merck pulled the drug from the market on September 30, 2004 due to increased observations of cardiac arrest and stroke in many consumers. Merck faced an ethical dilemma when it found increased observations of cardiovascular problems in patients. However, it took many years for the company to pull its top selling drugs from the market. The ethical issue, the interested parties and solutions will be addressed in the following paragraphs (Brooks & Dunn, 2012). Ethical Dilemma As in many industries, the pharmaceutical industry has great competition. Vioxx was competing successfully with Pfizer’s products, Celebrex and Bextra. However, Merck’s product was especially thriving because, unlike Celebrex and Bextra, Vioxx did not contain naproxen. This ingredient is harmful to the gastrointestinal system (Cavusgil, 2007). By 2003, Vioxx gained revenue for Merck that reached $2.5 billion...

Words: 1317 - Pages: 6

Free Essay

Merck: Recall of Vioxx

...Analysis #1 Tuesday, January 22, 2013 Matt Janes Merck & Company, Inc: The Recall of Vioxx Introduction Geroge W. Merck stated once stated, “We try never to forget that medicine is for the people. It is not for the profits. The profits follow. Initially, Vioxx was the blockbuster drug that Merck needed due to the upcoming Zocor patent cliff in 2006. With an estimated 27,785 heart attacks and sudden cardiac deaths that could have been avoided if Celebrex had been used instead of Vioxx, Merck faces the possibility of not only having to pay enormous civil and criminal penalties, but also losing the trust of patients. Many parties are partially culpable, but Merck faces the severe uphill battle of regaining a reputation that once served as a market differentiator; in the 1980’s, Merck was voted the “Most Admired Company in American Business” for seven consecutive years. A critical issue in this case is to analyze the events listed in the case and propose an alternate course of action that may help prevent future deaths from other pharmaceutical drugs while not prohibitively restricting innovative research that could potentially save lives if tested properly. Critical Points and Issues Merck was relying on the success of Vioxx due to Zocor’s expiring patent and the direct competition Vioxx was engaged in with Celebrex, which had a first mover advantage. While Celebrex was also a Cox-2 inhibitor, Vioxx was the only Cox-2 inhibitor proven to be beneficial for......

Words: 2144 - Pages: 9

Premium Essay

Merck, the Fda, and the Vioxx Recall

...Merck, the FDA, and the Vioxx Recall 1. Do you believe that Merck acted in a socially responsible and ethical manner with regard to Vioxx? Why or Why not? In your answer, please address the company’s drug development and testing, marketing and advertising, relationships with government regulators and policymakers, and handling of the recall. I do not believe that Merck made a socially responsible decision when Vioxx was introduced into the pharmaceutical market. Scientists that were involved in product development and testing knew that there were serious health risks that could be side effects of the medication- such as cardiovascular complications. If they considered the lives that could have potentially been and as we know now were affected, the medication could have been revamped with changes that would minimize these harmful side effects. During the development and testing phase for Vioxx – issues regarding the safety of the drug were questioned due to the many cases of heart attacks resulting from the medication (more so than Aleve and Celebrex). The advertising technique that was used was thru direct-to-consumer. This was new in the pharmaceutical industry as it was the first time they were allowed to advertise to consumers. They used an Olympic figure skater as the primary character within their commercials. Consumers then would request this medication, making doctors feel obliged to prescribe. The government and policymakers received large sums of money from the...

Words: 314 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Merck

...Introduction Merck was established in the U.S. in 1891, but its roots trace back to Friedrich Jacob Merck’s purchase of a German drug store in 1668. Today the company is a top tier global entity, a “research-driven” pharmaceutical company “dedicated to putting patients first.” Merck’s mission is to “provide society with superior products that improve the quality of life and satisfy customer needs, provide employees with meaningful work and investors with a superior rate of return.” As a long time player in the U.S. pharmaceutical industry, Merck has had extensive experience in assigning and dividing complex tasks among its many specialized departments. Specialization allows Merck to operate efficiently and bring new drugs to American patients. On May 20, 1999, the FDA approved Merck’s application to market Vioxx, a new arthritis pain-reliever. The effort to create a successful drug at Merck was no small task, not only did the company need to develop, test, and receive approval for a new product. It also needed to make sure the drug was successfully marketed to the right consumers. By the end of 1999, over 5 million prescriptions had been written for Vioxx and it had been launched in 47 countries. The Vioxx launch went particularly well, and Merck splashed its success across the front page of its Annual Report with the lead, “Vioxx: Our biggest, fastest and best launch ever.” New Vioxx sales came at an important time for Merck. The exclusive patents to four major drugs......

Words: 492 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Merck & Company: Evaluating a Drug Licensing Opportunity

...Problem Definition Should Rich Kender recommend licensing Davanrik, making Merck & Company responsible for its manufacture and its marketing? In order to provide Rich Kender with a good and thorough analysis and recommendation on the Davanrik licensing project, we need to answer the following guidance questions: I. How has Merck been able to achieve substantial returns to capital given the large costs and lengthy time to develop drugs? II. How much should they pay? III. What is the expected value of the licensing arrangement to LAB? IV. How would our analysis change if the costs of launching Davanrik for weight loss were $225 million instead of $100 million? In our analysis we will build a decision tree that shows the cash flows and probabilities at all stages of the FDA approval process. We will assume a royalty fee of 5% on the cash flows that Merck receives from Davanrik after successful launch. Analysis Merck is in the business of developing compounds for pharmaceutical compounds. The required research and development efforts preceding the launch of a successful blockbuster drug is extensive and lengthy process and is therefore a very expensive one. Nevertheless, Merck has proven perfectly capable to achieve high returns on capital. This is a result of numerous factors. First of all, Merck has been able to generate tremendous amounts of sales. Since 1995, Merck has launched 15 new products, resulting in 1999 sales of $32.7 billion, which includes $15.2......

Words: 581 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Merck & Company - an Opportunity to Evaluate the Licensing of a Drug

...Problem Definition Should Rich Kender recommend licensing Davanrik, making Merck & Company responsible for its manufacture and its marketing? In order to provide Rich Kender with a good and thorough analysis and recommendation on the Davanrik licensing project, we need to answer the following guidance questions: I. How has Merck been able to achieve substantial returns to capital given the large costs and lengthy time to develop drugs? II. How much should they pay? III. What is the expected value of the licensing arrangement to LAB? IV. How would our analysis change if the costs of launching Davanrik for weight loss were $225 million instead of $100 million? In our analysis we will build a decision tree that shows the cash flows and probabilities at all stages of the FDA approval process. We will assume a royalty fee of 5% on the cash flows that Merck receives from Davanrik after successful launch. Analysis Merck is in the business of developing compounds for pharmaceutical compounds. The required research and development efforts preceding the launch of a successful blockbuster drug is extensive and lengthy process and is therefore a very expensive one. Nevertheless, Merck has proven perfectly capable to achieve high returns on capital. This is a result of numerous factors. First of all, Merck has been able to generate tremendous amounts of sales. Since 1995, Merck has launched 15 new products, resulting in 1999 sales of $32.7 billion,......

Words: 320 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

I Do Not Believe That Merck Made a Socially Responsible Decision When Vioxx Was Introduced Into the Pharmaceutical Market.

...I do not believe that Merck made a socially responsible decision when Vioxx was introduced into the pharmaceutical market. Scientists that were involved in product development and testing knew that there were serious health risks that could be side effects of the medication- such as cardiovascular complications. If they considered the lives that could have potentially been and as we know now were affected, the medication could have been revamped with changes that would minimize these harmful side effects. During the development and testing phase for Vioxx – issues regarding the safety of the drug were questioned due to the many cases of heart attacks resulting from the medication (more so than Aleve and Celebrex). The advertising technique that was used was thru direct-to-consumer. This was new in the pharmaceutical industry as it was the first time they were allowed to advertise to consumers. They used an Olympic figure skater as the primary character within their commercials. Consumers then would request this medication, making doctors feel obliged to prescribe. The government and policymakers received large sums of money from the development company during the advertising phase and market introduction. When studies became public of Vioxx users being twice as susceptible to heart attacks, Dr. Kim recommended recalling the drugs due to the elevated risks for users as well as the lack of knowledge as to what was causing the heart attacks. There were mixed emotions for some......

Words: 260 - Pages: 2

Free Essay

Merck Drug Co

...Evaluating a Drug Licensing Opportunity Statement of the problem- Merck must determine whether or not to bid to license Davanrik My recommendation is that Merck must definitely make a competitive bid for Davanrik. The total expected value from the deal based numbers given in the Merck article is a healthy $14million so keeping a 20% incentive, Merck should bid no more than $11million for Davanrik as the initial licensing fee. Looking at the background of Merck, it is clear that it is a successful company with good cash flow and investable assets. Not only can Merck afford to take risk but also given the fact that several of its key patents are expiring in 2002, Merck must replenish its patented product portfolio otherwise Merck risks loosing its profit margins in future. Since the pharmaceutical business is based on high-risk high-reward model, Merck should be aggressive in getting new products on the market. Although Merck could be developing its own new products, Davanrik presents an interesting opportunity since the parent company LAB pharmaceuticals is eager to license the drug in light of its recent FDA rejection. Looking for a much needed cash influx, LAB might be willing to strike a bargain. To evaluate the risks/rewards of the deal we construct a decision tree for Merck. The structure of tree presents a clearer picture of the possible risks and rewards during the comprehensive FDA approval process. Looking at this decision tree in phase 3, perhaps Merck......

Words: 721 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Merck

...CASE 6-MERCK Problems The first problem is even before the drug was approved, some evidence cast doubt on the safety of Vioxx. The study found—as the company had expected—that Vioxx was easier on the stomach than naproxen. But it also found that the Vioxx group had nearly five times as many heart attacks. Some analysts criticized DTC advertising, saying that it put pressure on doctors to prescribe drugs that might not be best for the patient. Solutions Merck faced serious and terrible situation because its medicine caused patients’ deaths. According to the case, The Merck Inc.’s solution is that recalled all the Vioxx which cause the stock price decrease dramatically. But it is important to repair the company’s image and leave good impression to people. By apologizing to consumers through TV and taking responsible for the mistakes will help Merck Inc. retrieve their consumers. On the other hand, analyst argued that the methods DTC advertise their products are criticized. The reason is that analysts think that “when a patient comes in and wants something, there is a desire to serve them.” Because of the direct-to-consumer ad makes patients believe that all drugs are safe, it is not correct to leave such impression to consumers. Drugs are not safe at all, and doctor should examine all of them before recommending to patients. Recommendations I think the solution is a good symbol to help company’s development. As we all know, if they only cared about profit, not their......

Words: 454 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Merck

...9-201-023 REV: MARCH 25, 2003 RICHARD S. RUBACK Merck & Company: Evaluating a Drug Licensing Opportunity Rich Kender, Vice President of Financial Evaluation & Analysis at Merck, was working with his team to decide whether his company should license Davanrik, a new drug with the potential to treat both depression and obesity. The small pharmaceutical concern that developed the drug, LAB Pharmaceuticals, lacked the resources to complete the lengthy approval process, manufacture the compound, and market the drug. LAB had approached Merck with an offer to license the compound. Under this agreement, Merck would be responsible for the approval of Davanrik, its manufacture, and its marketing. The company would pay LAB an initial fee, a royalty on all sales, and make additional payments as Davanrik completed each stage of the approval process. Merck In 2000, Merck & Co., Inc. was a global research-driven pharmaceutical company that discovers, develops, manufactures and markets a broad range of human and animal health products, directly and through its joint ventures, and provides pharmaceutical benefit management services (PBM) through Merck-Medco Managed Care. Since 1995, Merck had launched 15 new products including Vioxx™ for the treatment of osteoarthritis, Fosamax™ for the treatment of osteoporosis and Singulair™ for treating asthma. The Company earned $5.9 billion on 1999 sales1 of $32.7 billion, about a 20% increase from 1998. Exhibits 1 and 2 contain Merck’s Income...

Words: 2360 - Pages: 10

Free Essay

Vioxx Recall

...Abstract The following text examines the recall of the drug Vioxx and the pharmaceutical industry’s responsibilities when it comes to ethical testing and distribution of consumer medicines. The role of the Federal Drug Administration is examined. The text also contemplates the actions that Merck, the maker of Vioxx, took during the product’s recall and how we can improve the current drug testing system to protect consumers. INTRODUCTION Merck, one of the biggest pharmaceutical companies in the world, created Vioxx, a once best-selling painkiller. In 2004, the company learned that its drug increased the risk of stroke and heart attack. After a few different studies, Merck finally gave in and recalled the product. The company had to face troubling questions and allegations that Vioxx had caused many deaths even though it wasn’t proven to be completely safe. Do you believe that Merck acted in a socially responsible and ethical manner with regard to Vioxx? Why or why not? In your answer, please address the company’s drug development and testing, marketing and advertising, relationships with government regulators and policy makers, and handling of the recall. I don’t think that Vioxx acted in a socially responsible and ethical manner with regard to Vioxx. Even before the drug was approved and released into the market, there was evidence that Vioxx wasn’t 100% safe. Dr. Alise Reicin, one of the scientists that worked for Merck at the time in 1997, stated in an e-mail......

Words: 954 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Merck & Company -Evaluating a Drug Licensing Opportunity .Doc

...INTRODUCTION Merck & Company : Evaluating the Licensing Opportunity Various recently-born biotech companies sell their technologies in either finished or early stage to bigger companies in need of financing capital to preceed business, while those bigger companies acquire technologies to scout for promising profitable business. This sort of process needs numbers of decision makings and agreements from both parties on the valuation methods is crucial here. The valuation method being used has to hold objective validity and generality. For the managers to make accurate forecast of future profitability in managing companies, quantified decision making process is needed. Here we are dealing about whether Merck should give financial support to the R&D project of Davanrik offered by LAB, and about the process of valuation and the final decision. First we are to make brief of LAB’s business proposal and practice detailed valuation functions to decide if the proposal is profitable or not. And finally we will make a decision based on the valuation process in perspective of Rich Kender, Vice President of Financial Evaluation & Analysis of Merck. Brief introduction of Merck and its agenda regarding Davanrik project As a world-class pharmaceutical company concentrated on R&Ds, Merck is performing various researches and developments upon medical supplies for human and animals. Merck is providing Pharmaceutical Benefit Management (i.e. PBM) through a company called Merck-Medco......

Words: 1134 - Pages: 5

Premium Essay

1. on Balance, Do You Think Merck Is an Ethical and Socially Responsible Company? Why or Why Not?

...I believe neither Merck nor Pfizer acted ethically or socially responsible during the Vioxx disaster. Evidence suggests that Merck might have knows about the harmful side effects of Vioxx and yet they hesitated for over 3 years to recall the drug. There was also an allegation that the company had manipulated and covered-up the results of the medical trials in their favor. An ethical thing to do would be to simultaneously recall the drug as well as inform the public about the dangers of using Vioxx. Instead Merck not only continued to produce and sell the drug, they had also spent hundreds of millions of dollars a year in marketing, partly to counteract any questions raised. According to The Wall Street Journal Merck’s “training document listed potential tough questions about Vioxx and said in capital letters, "DODGE!" , meaning that the company advised marketers to avoid direct answers on the health consequences of the drug. The article even mentions that many doctors and medical professors who raised questions about the safety of Vioxx were being pressured and intimidated by Merck. There is no doubt that all this behavior was deliberate and illegal. A company doing this kind of practices cannot call itself ethical. After the Vioxx scandal, Pfizer - the producer of Celebrex and Bextra (drugs with a very similar chemical composition to Vioxx and its biggest competitors) was in a perfect spot to immediately recall it’s medicine from the market and therefore prove to the public...

Words: 517 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Merck & Company Evaluating a Drug Licensing Opportunity

...Table of Content | |Page | |1. Executive Summary…………………………………………………………… |1 | |2. Main Report…………………………………………………………………….. |2 | |3. Bibliography…………………………………………………………………….. |6 | 1. Executive Summary In 2002 the patents for the most popular drugs which generated $5.7 billion in worldwide sales would be expired. In order to anticipate the loss of sales, it is recommended to update the product portfolio by investing in the development of patented new products. LAB proposed 17 years exclusivity on Davanrik, a substance which has probability to be efficacious for depression or weight loss or both indications. Up to now LAB has completed preclinical testing and entering clinical testing. The clinical testing will take about 7 years which is divided into 3 phases. Based on the analysis given on the report, the cost on Phase I will come up to $30 million and the Phase II will be $25 million. The outcome of Phase III varies and depends on the result on Phase II. The expected outcomes are: Davanrik is 10% effective for depression only, 15% for weight loss only and 5% for both......

Words: 1007 - Pages: 5