Showing posts with label Qui tam. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Qui tam. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 15, 2013

United States Files Complaint Against Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. for Allegedly Paying Kickbacks to Doctors in Exchange for Prescribing Its Drugs



The Justice Department announced today that the United States has filed a second civil false claims lawsuit against Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. involving alleged kickbacks paid by the company to health care providers. The government’s complaint seeks damages and civil penalties under the False Claims Act and under the common law for paying kickbacks to doctors to induce them to prescribe Novartis pharmaceutical products that were reimbursed by federal health care programs. The lawsuit alleges that the payments violated the Anti-Kickback Statute and, as a result of Novartis’s unlawful conduct, the government paid false claims for reimbursement for Novartis pharmaceutical products.
“Kickback schemes like those alleged in this case not only call into question the integrity of individual medical decisions, but they also raise the cost of health care for all of us,” said Stuart F. Delery, Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division. “Patients deserve care based on a doctor’s sound medical judgment, not the doctor’s personal financial interest. The Department of Justice will continue to pursue companies that use improper incentives, like those alleged here, to promote their products.”
 “As alleged, Novartis corrupted the prescription drug dispensing process with multi-million dollar ‘incentive programs’ that targeted doctors who, in exchange for illegal kickbacks, steered patients toward its drugs. And for its investment, Novartis reaped dramatically increased profits on these drugs, and Medicare, Medicaid, and other federal healthcare programs were left holding the bag, doling out millions of dollars in kickback-tainted claims,” said U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Preet Bharara. “Healthcare fraud imposes tremendous costs and causes great harm to an already burdened healthcare system, and the government will not tolerate it. The widespread kickback fraud alleged in our two lawsuits against Novartis – which only a few years ago settled a False Claims Act case involving violations of the Anti-Kickback Statute based on illegal payments to doctors – makes us question whether Novartis is getting the message.”
The following allegations are based on the government’s complaint filed in the Southern District of New York:
Novartis, a pharmaceutical company headquartered in East Hanover, N.J., is a subsidiary of Novartis AG, an international pharmaceutical company headquartered in Basel, Switzerland. From January 2001 through at least November 2011, Novartis systematically violated the Anti-Kickback Statute , which prohibits the payment of remuneration to induce referrals of items or services covered by Medicare, Medicaid, and other federally-funded programs. Indeed, Novartis violated its own internal policies concerning speaker programs, which require that the programs have an educational purpose and that slides about the company’s drugs be presented. Novartis violated the Anti-Kickback Statute by paying doctors to speak about certain drugs, including its hypertension drugs Lotrel and Valturna and its diabetes drug Starlix, at events that were often little or nothing more than social occasions for the doctors. The payments and lavish dinners given to the doctors were, in reality, kickbacks to the speakers and attendees to induce them to write prescriptions for Novartis drugs. In many instances Novartis made payments to doctors for purported speaker programs that either did not occur at all or that had few or no attendees, and thousands of programs were held all over the country at which few or no slides were shown and the doctors who participated spent little or no time discussing the drug at issue.
Many speaker programs were also held in circumstances in which it would have been virtually impossible for any presentation to be made, such as on fishing trips off the Florida coast. Other Novartis events were held at Hooters restaurants.
In connection with these programs, Novartis also frequently treated the doctors to expensive dinners that they hosted at high-end restaurants. For example, a July 5 dinner for three, including the speaker, at a Washington, D.C. restaurant cost $2,016, or $672 per person. Novartis also paid a $1,000 honorarium to the speaker for this program. One of the two attendees had attended the same program a short time earlier. At another program held on Valentine’s Day in 2006, Novartis paid $3,127, for a meal for two at a West Des Moines, Iowa restaurant, or $1,042 per person.

Novartis’s internal analyses show that speaker programs had a high return on investment in terms of the additional prescriptions for its drugs written by the doctors who participated in the programs, both as speakers and attendees, with the highest return arising from payments to doctors as “honoraria” for speaking. In short, doctors increased the number of prescriptions they wrote when they were being paid by Novartis to speak about a drug. As a result, Novartis spent millions on speaker programs yearly. According to Novartis’s data, during the period from January 2002 through November 2011, it spent nearly $65 million and conducted more than 38,000 speaker programs for just three drugs: the hypertension drugs, Lotrel and Valturna, and the diabetes drug, Starlix. In the absence of a legitimate purpose for many of the programs, the payments were nothing more than kickbacks to the doctors that induced them to write prescriptions in violation of the Anti-Kickback Statute .
Novartis was well aware that its speaker programs created opportunities to provide kickbacks to doctors. In September 2010, Novartis entered into a settlement with the U.S. Department of Justice to settle False Claims Act lawsuits based in part on violations of the AKS due to illegal remuneration paid to doctors through such mechanisms as speaker programs, and signed a corporate integrity agreement with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General agreeing to implement a rigorous compliance program.
Even after entering into the corporate integrity agreement, Novartis’s compliance program failed to prevent kickbacks from being paid in conjunction with Novartis’s speaker programs. No individual at the company was tasked with examining its speaker program data to determine whether the programs were used for an illegitimate purpose. Furthermore, although instances of speaker program abuse were reported to Novartis, sanctions were generally mere slaps on the wrist. In some cases, sales representatives who violated Novartis’s own speaker program policies were nevertheless promoted. Even after September 2010, Novartis continued to conduct bogus speaker programs that were simply vehicles for paying kickbacks to doctors in the form of honoraria and expensive meals
As a consequence of its violations of the Anti-Kickback Statute , Novartis has caused the submission of numerous false claims for drugs to federal health care programs, including Medicare, Medicaid, TRICARE and the Department of Veterans Affairs health care program, resulting in millions of dollars in reimbursements. Novartis’s unlawful conduct caused those false claims to be made to and paid by the federal health care programs.
The complaint seeks treble damages and penalties under the False Claims Act for the false claims for reimbursement for Lotrel, Valturna, and Stalix, as well as for other Novartis cardiovascular drugs. In addition, the United States seeks damages under the common law.

The complaint was filed in a lawsuit brought under the qui tam, or whistleblower, provisions of the False Claims Act by Oswald Bilotta, a former Novartis sales representative. Under the Act’squi tam provisions, a private citizen, known as a “relator,” can sue on behalf of the United States and share in any recovery. The United States may join the lawsuit, as it has here. The lawsuit isUnited States ex rel. Bilotta v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation et al., No. 11-cv-0071 (S.D.N.Y.). The claims in the complaint filed by the government are allegations only, and there has been no determination of liability.

On April 23, 2013, the United States filed a separate complaint in the Southern District of New York against Novartis, alleging that the company gave kickbacks, in the form of rebates and discounts, to pharmacies in exchange for the pharmacies’ agreement to switch transplant patients from competitor drugs to a Novartis product. As here, that complaint seeks treble damages and civil penalties under the False Claims Act and remedies under the common law.

This resolution is part of the government’s emphasis on combating health care fraud and another step for the Health Care Fraud Prevention and Enforcement Action Team (HEAT) initiative, which was announced by Attorney General Eric Holder and Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services in May 2009. The partnership between the two departments has focused efforts to reduce and prevent Medicare and Medicaid financial fraud through enhanced cooperation. One of the most powerful tools in that effort is the False Claims Act, which the Justice Department has used to recover more than $10.3 billion since January 2009 in cases involving fraud against federal health care programs. The Justice Department’s total recoveries in False Claims Act cases since January 2009 are over $14.2 billion.

Saturday, February 16, 2013

Why Drug Compounders Will See False Claims Act Litigation Soon

Why Drug Compounders Will See False Claims Act Litigation Soon

See also author of blogs' article Author, King for a Day, An Overview of Qui Tam Litigation Under State and Federal Law, Oklahoma Bar Journal, May 1999.  Although some of the procedural law has changed regarding Federal Qui Tam litigation, the substance and explanation of Qui Tam ligitation is still the same.


Tuesday, July 31, 2012


Marketed Unapproved Drugs and False Claims Act Activities


Information is found at FDA website located  here.

Thursday, July 5, 2012

GlaxoSmithKline's (GSK) $3 Billion Whistleblower Settlement Has Paid for One Of America's Most Expensive Failed Corporate Internal Investigations, Qui Tam Whistleblowers' Attorneys Say


press release
July 2, 2012, 11:48 a.m. EDT

GlaxoSmithKline's (GSK) $3 Billion Whistleblower Settlement Has Paid for One Of America's Most Expensive Failed Corporate Internal Investigations, Qui Tam Whistleblowers' Attorneys Say


PHILADELPHIA, July 2, 2012 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ -- GlaxoSmithKline has just paid for one of the most expensive failed internal investigations in corporate history, qui tam whistleblower attorney Brian Kenney said today. His law firm, Kenny & McCafferty, P.C., represents the two whistleblowers who sparked the nine-year federal probe that ended with today's $3 billion payment to settle off-label drug marketing allegations involving nine prescription drugs.
"When our clients were forced out of their marketing positions, GlaxoSmithKline ('GSK') had proof of illegal off-label prescription drug marketing. Our clients properly reported those marketing misdeeds to management in 2001. An ensuing GSK internal investigation verified their allegations, but the company took no action, choosing hefty profits over compliance and patient safety," said whistleblower attorney Tavy Deming of Kenney & McCafferty.
"GSK could have saved hundreds of millions, perhaps a billion or more dollars of the $3 billion it paid today by following through on the combined Human Resources /Corporate Compliance investigation they launched. Instead they ignored evidence of improper marketing and physician kickbacks. When you look at the detail and accuracy of Greg Thorpe's written complaints distributed to the highest levels of Glaxo (See 'Document Links' Below) it's almost surreal that the company took no corrective action. Now more than a decade later, GSK is essentially admitting that Thorpe had been right in 2001," Kenney said. "It's been a very, very, very long 10 years for whistleblowers Thorpe and Blair Hamrick."
GSK's top management was aware of illegal marketing schemes involving the drugs, according to filed court documents. When the two Kenney & McCafferty-represented whistleblowers reported their concerns about illegal marketing practices they were witnessing in the field, GSK's top compliance executive, an attorney who now holds a similar position with another medical device manufacturer, became involved in and oversaw the ensuing internal investigation.
Instead of changing the illegal conduct, the Company retaliated against the whistleblowers and they became the first to file an off-label marketing qui tam whistleblower Complaint against GSK. The original Complaint is one of the first ever filed alleging prescription drug off-label promotion, Kenney said.
When the whistleblowers' Complaints were still under seal and being investigated by the government GSK allegedly falsified and concealed documents in connection with an FDA inquiry into whether GSK marketed the antidepressant drug Wellbutrin off-label for weight loss, a central allegation in the whistleblowers' Complaints. That led to the indictment of a GSK associate corporate counsel, said Deming. Federal charges against the former associate general counsel later were subsequently dismissed by the court. (U.S. v. Lauren Stevens, District of Maryland)
Thorpe and Hamrick provided first-hand revelations of GSK's pervasive marketing misconduct relating to the nine drugs identified in Kenney & McCafferty's Complaint (See "Document Links" Below) and Exhibits (See "Document Links" Below) unsealed with today's settlement. According to Emily Lambert of Kenney & McCafferty, the Government joined the whistleblowers' case and filed a Complaint-in-Intervention adopting the whistleblower's claims. (See "Document Links" Below)
Extremely persuasive proof exposing illegal marketing of the asthma drug Advair for mild asthma was included in the insider evidence that Thorpe and Hamrick provided to Government investigators, Deming said. GSK's mild asthma marketing campaign contravened Advair's approved asthma use, which was limited to moderate and severe forms of asthma, and a black box warning on the drug's label, yet GSK's marketing efforts continued unabated into 2010. As a result, Advair's portion of taxpayers' recovery represents nearly 70 percent of the Government's total $1.017 billion civil settlement of our clients' claims, Lambert added.
The nine prescription drugs covered by the settlement included Advair, Wellbutrin, Paxil, Lamictal, Zofran, Imitrex, Lotronex, Flovent and Valtrex.
GSK maintained an elaborate illegal marketing regime for the prescription drugs included in today's settlement, including, according to filed documents:
Paying physicians (who could be counted on to influence their peers) as much as $25,000 for being a GSK "advisory board" member;
Enrolling 49,000 physicians and health professionals to be part of its speakers bureau;
Identifying physicians in academia to pay to speak on behalf of one of the company's drugs;
Creating the PowerPoint "slide kits" that physicians would use to deliver canned presentations;
Using an elaborate "FaxBack" system allowing drug marketing reps to suggest articles related to off-label uses. The physicians would order these -off-label promotional materials by calling a toll-free number, and thus not appear to be responding to an illegal marketing effort by the drug marketing representative;
Pushing Imitrex, an adult medicine for migraine, for mild headaches, as well as for use in children, despite the FDA's rejection of GSK's application for child use due to lack of efficacy;
Pushing Lamictal, a drug approved only for partial seizures, in adults for other diagnoses. In at least one case a patient died from a reaction that the company had evidence could occur;
Marketing Paxil, the antidepressant, to children under 18 when it had not been approved for youngsters, and despite GSK's own clinical trails that had shown that the drug was ineffective for children and also heightened the risk of suicide or other self-harming behavior three-fold; and,
Marketing the antidepressant Wellbutrin as superior to other antidepressant alternatives due to increased sexual functioning and weight loss, pushing the drug as the "happy, horny, skinny drug," to concisely encapsulate GSK's off-label Wellbutrin marketing campaign.
Physicians are free to prescribe drugs for off-label uses, but pharmaceutical companies are prohibited from marketing the drugs for uses that have not been approved by the FDA. Federal laws also prohibit pharmaceutical companies from paying kickbacks to physicians to induce prescriptions. Generally, government-funded healthcare programs such as Medicare and Medicaid preclude reimbursement for off-label prescriptions. When a pharmaceutical company's illegal marketing practices cause off-label prescriptions to be written by doctors, and those prescriptions are paid for by Medicare and Medicaid, the payment becomes an actionable False Claims Act ("FCA") violation, according to Kenney, who is a former federal prosecutor.
Under the FCA, qui tam actions allow private citizens with knowledge of fraud to help the Government recover ill-gotten gains and additional civil penalties. The FCA allows the Government to collect up to three times the amount it was defrauded, in addition to civil penalties from $5,500 to $11,000 per false claim.
In successful qui tam whistleblower cases in which the Government intervenes, whistleblowers are entitled to receive a percentage of qui tam recoveries, typically 15-to-25 percent, generally known as, "the relator's share."
Under the terms of the settlement agreement, the Government and the whistleblowers did not concede that their respective claims are not well founded. In turn, as is typical in civil agreements, GSK expressly denied liability, except for those admissions GSK agreed to make in connection with connection with a criminal Plea Agreement. Specifically, according to the agreement, GSK has agreed to plead guilty to criminal charges that the company misbranded Wellbutrin and Paxil and it failed to report data relating to clinical experience, along with other data and information regarding the diabetes drug Avandia to the Food and Drug Administration ("FDA") in mandatory reports, all in violation of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act ("FDCA").
In addition to paying a $1.042 billion civil settlement to the federal and state Governments, as part of the Settlement Agreement GSK agreed to be bound by a Corporate Integrity Agreement ("CIA") with the Office of Inspector General of the United States Department of Health and Human Services ("OIG-HHS").
The federal investigation into GSK's marketing practices was conducted through a collaborative effort of the U.S. Department of Justice, and the U.S. Attorney's Offices for the District of Massachusetts and the District of Colorado. Massachusetts Assistant Attorney General Bob Patten led the investigation on behalf of the states and the National Association of Medicaid Fraud Control Units ("NAMFCU").
Case Caption: United States ex rel. Thorpe, et al. v. GSK, et al.Civ. No.: 11-10398 (D.Mass)