Bharat Biotech Vaccine
Fair Pharma Scorecard
Applying human rights to pharma
Menu
Click on ‘Explanation about the score’ sign next to each entry to expand and learn more.
The company should publicly commit to human rights in relation to product development and marketing, by adopting an official human rights policy statement recognising the right to the highest attainable standard of health. The company should endeavour to integrate human rights into its strategies, policies, programmes, projects, and activities.
The company should also have a publicly available global access plan for their Covid-19 product, based on human rights standards, with measurable targets and lines of accountability.
Eli Lilly has made a general commitment to equitable access to medicines in low- and middle-income countries.
It has also published ‘Principles of Covid-19 antibody therapy pricing and access’, and an Infographic on access and affordability principles for neutralizing antibodies.
Eli Lilly has not published a commitment to comply with human rights.
The company should constructively engage with international initiatives for the equitable distribution of vaccines and therapeutics, such as the Covid-19 Technology Access Pool (C-TAP) or the Medicines Patent Pool (MPP), and the ACT Accelerator (COVAX). The company should also publicly commit to not enforcing the exclusive rights of Covid-19 related patents, and enter into non-exclusive, transparent licensing agreements for its Covid-19 products with other companies.
Eli Lilly has not committed to C-TAP or the MPP.
Eli Lilly has not made a commitment not to enforce patents: ‘Eli Lilly [has] filed and obtained patents widely, including in countries hit hard by the pandemic, such as Brazil, Russia, South Africa and Indonesia. Where patents are granted, the monopoly does not expire until 2029 and could even persist longer because of patent-term extensions’.Â
Eli Lilly states on its website: Olumiant is patent-protected in the USA until 2030; in Europe until 2029 and Japan until 2033.Â
Eli Lilly has not signed an agreement with the ACT Accelerator.
Eli Lilly has signed deals with Indian generic manufacturers for royalty-free voluntary licensing agreements (Cipla, Natco pharma, Doctor Reddy’s, Sun Pharma, Lupin, Torrent and BDR).Â
Note: the geographical scope of Lilly’s licensing policy is limited to India, which greatly restricts its impact. While the voluntary nature of Lilly’s licenses is good, broader licensing territories have a greater impact on global access.
The company should engage in efforts to further equitable distribution of Covid-19 vaccines/therapeutics, by equitably distributing its supplies globally, devising fair pricing strategies, and making the active ingredient for its product available to other manufacturers. The company should also engage in full technology transfer to other manufacturers, including the necessary transfer of skills, legal components, knowledge and intellectual property. Where applicable, the company should agree to waive rights in regulatory test data, and refrain from enforcing TRIPS+ measures.
There is no evidence that Eli Lilly makes the active ingredient for Baricitinib available to other manufacturers (there is only one supplier of the generic ingredient Baricitinib)
Eli Lilly has entered into non-exclusive licensing agreements with Indian manufacturers but there is no evidence of full technology transfer.
Baricitinib has been approved for other indications, and generic versions already available in India and Bangladesh for nearly 400 times less than what Eli Lilly charges (2326 US dollars per course of treatment vs 5.50USD in India)
