November 14, 2012—A private, for-profit immunization clinic in Las Vegas has filed a federal lawsuit seeking to stop GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) from selling vaccines to a Nevada local public health entity at voluntarily discounted prices negotiated by the 340B Prime Vendor Program (PVP).
In an Oct. 25 complaint filed in federal district court in Las Vegas, The Vaccine Center argues that the voluntary price reductions on GSK vaccines that Southern Nevada Health District obtains through its participation in PVP represents unlawful price discrimination, monopolization, and restraint of trade under federal and state antitrust laws.[ms-protect-content id=”2799″] The clinic seeks an injunction against the discounts as well as monetary damages from GSK, the health district, and Apexus, the federal contractor that manages PVP.
By statute, 340B drug discounts are unavailable on vaccines. PVP, however, has negotiated voluntary non-340B discounts with four vaccine manufacturers (GSK, Merck, Novartis, and Sanofi-Pasteur) on behalf of its members as a value-added service. The Vaccine Center argues that “there is no such thing as ‘value-added products’ under the laws or regulations that govern the [340B] program” and that PVP and GSK thus “are not permitted to agree amongst themselves to include vaccines under the program.”
Apexus’ current contract with the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) to manage PVP, which was signed in 2009, states that the 340B prime vendor may offer “other value-added catalog items.” Provision of “value-added products and services” is also one of the required elements of the contract’s standards of performance for the prime vendor.
The case is The Vaccine Center v. GlaxoSmithKline (D. Nev. Case 2:12-cv-01849-JCM-PAL).[/ms-protect-content]