A version of this text first appeared in CNBC’s Healthy Returns newsletter, which brings the most recent health-care news straight to your inbox. Subscribe here to receive future editions.
Pfizer and Novo Nordisk are in a takeover clash over the obesity biotech Metsera, with each pharmaceutical giants raising their bids for the startup as of Monday.Â
As of now, Metsera says that Novo Nordisk’s as much as $10 billion offer for the corporate is “superior” to Pfizer’s latest proposal. Here’s what that you must know in regards to the heated bidding war that erupted last week.Â
What happened?Â
Here’s the timeline.Â
Pfizer in September said that it might acquire Metsera for $4.9 billion, or as much as $7.3 billion with future payments – a deal that may very well be the corporate’s golden ticket to enter the space after struggling to bring its own obesity products to market.Â
But Novo Nordisk on Thursday launched a takeover bid valuing the biotech at around $6 billion, or as much as $9 billion, triggering a deadline of 4 business days for Pfizer to renegotiate its offer. The Danish drugmaker’s unsolicited bid isn’t seen within the industry, and Pfizer definitely wasn’t completely satisfied about it.Â
Pfizer on Friday filed its first lawsuit against Novo Nordisk and Metsera, in search of to dam the biotech from terminating its existing merger cope with Pfizer. On Monday, Pfizer filed a second lawsuit against the businesses, alleging that Novo Nordisk’s try to outbid Pfizer to accumulate Metsera is anticompetitive.
In an announcement on Monday, Metsera called Pfizer’s litigation arguments “nonsense” and said it might address them in court.Â
Metsera on Tuesday said Novo Nordisk’s latest as much as $10 billion bid is “superior” to a revised offer from Pfizer, which values the startup at roughly $8.1 billion.Â
Under the terms of the unique agreement for Pfizer to accumulate Metsera, the larger drugmaker has two business days to barter adjustments to its proposal. If Metsera’s board believes that Novo Nordisk’s proposal continues to be higher than Pfizer’s after that window, Metsera can be entitled to finish the present merger agreement, in line with the discharge.
Why are Pfizer and Novo Nordisk fighting over Metsera?Â
Thomas Fuller | SOPA Images | Lightrocket | Getty Images
Metsera, founded in 2022, brings a pipeline of each oral and injectable treatments with different targets that the corporate has picked up through its own licensing and acquisition deals. That features a GLP-1 drug and amylin treatment that Metsera is developing to be taken once monthly,Â
meaning that patients can take it less continuously than existing weekly injections.
Metsera may very well be key to Pfizer’s ambitions of entering the highly lucrative obesity market. Pfizer notoriously faced a string of setbacks with its own weight reduction candidates, scrapping two separate pills during the last two years resulting from issues of safety.Â
Meanwhile, Novo Nordisk helped establish the load loss drug space, bringing to market highly effective GLP-1 drugs, including the diabetes injection Ozempic and obesity shot Wegovy. But the corporate is scrambling to regain its lead position available in the market after losing market share to its chief rival, Eli Lilly, during the last 12 months and struggling to impress investors with its current obesity pipeline.Â
The emergence of latest potential competitors available in the market from names like Amgen, Roche and Zealand Pharma is simply putting more pressure on Novo Nordisk to win back share.
But in a note on Thursday, TD Cowen analyst Michael Nedelcovych said it isn’t clear that Metsera’s GLP-1 or amylin drugs are “differentiated” from Novo Nordisk’s own medicines – raising questions on how much the corporate could gain from the deal.
“Value could also be driven by prospects for once-monthly dosing, but feasibility of this approach is just not yet proven,” he said. “Add regulatory risk and a possible bidding war, and this news gives us pause.”
In an email to clients on Monday, Mizuho health care equity strategist Jared Holz said that Novo Nordisk appears to be going after Metsera “as much for itself because it is to maintain [the biotech company’s drugs] out of the hands” of Pfizer or other drugmakers.Â
What do Pfizer’s lawsuits argue?Â
Pfizer’s federal antitrust suit alleges that Novo Nordisk’s proposed acquisition of Metsera would help it maintain its dominant position within the blockbuster obesity market by eliminating a smaller potential competitor, in line with the lawsuit filed Monday in U.S. District Court in Delaware. The suit also alleges that Metsera’s controlling shareholders conspired with the obesity biotech and Novo Nordisk.
Pfizer’s first lawsuit seeks to dam Metsera from terminating its existing merger cope with Pfizer. That suit, filed within the Delaware Court of Chancery, alleges that Novo Nordisk’s offer cannot qualify as a superior proposal because it isn’t reasonably more likely to be accomplished resulting from its significant regulatory risk.
Novo Nordisk, in response to the most recent lawsuit filed Monday, said “Pfizer’s baseless claims that Novo Nordisk intends to suppress innovation through our offer is fake and without merit.”
What’s next?Â
We’ll should see if Pfizer negotiates adjustments to its proposal with Metsera after the two-business-day period.Â
Meanwhile, a Delaware judge said at an emergency hearing on Tuesday that there’s currently no need for a court to grant Pfizer’s request to become involved in its bidding war with Novo Nordisk, Reuters reported. However the judge scheduled a hearing for Wednesday afternoon to review the method.Â
In response, Pfizer CFO Dave Denton said in an interview Tuesday that the corporate is “going to avail ourselves to all of our rights legally.”
“There are multiple avenues for us to accomplish that, so we’re not giving up on the fight obviously,” Denton said, without elaborating on the opposite paths Pfizer could take. “We feel like we’re in the fitting on this, and we’ll proceed to pursue all avenues to say our claims.”
We’ll proceed to follow the takeover saga, so stay tuned for our coverage!
Be at liberty to send any suggestions, suggestions, story ideas and data to Annika at a brand new email: annika.constantino@versantmedia.com.
Latest in health-care: Some House Republicans warm to extending tax credits to spare their districts pain, but time is slipping
Democrats in Congress have made extension of enhanced Reasonably priced Care Act tax credits a central demand for reopening the federal government.
Three days into ACA open enrollment and 35 days into the shutdown, there is no deal on the horizon. But more Republican representatives have voiced their support for extending tax credits as a few of their constituents contend with eye-popping premium increases for 2026.Â
While low-income ACA enrollees will proceed to receive tax credits written into the unique laws, the tax credits for middle class enrollees enacted in the course of the Covid pandemic in 2021 are set to run out at the top of this 12 months.Â
Insurers have boosted premiums a median of 26% for next 12 months, in line with health policy research organization KFF. But for enrollees who lose those enhanced tax credits, the effective price increases will probably be upwards of 300%, and among the hardest hit districts are in Texas, Georgia and Florida, all of which have mostly Republican representation within the House.Â
Last week, Centene CEO Sarah London expressed hope that Congress will come to a deal before the top of the 12 months, but expects that some enrollees may not join anyway. She said even when tax credits “are prolonged in the course of the cycle and also you go forward, for instance, with an extra 60-day special enrollment period, our view of market contraction for 2026 is within the high teens to mid-30s range.”
Raymond James policy analyst Chris Meekins told me if there’s a deal, Republicans are apt to demand an income cap that might exclude higher earners.Â
“Several moderate Democrats have expressed openness to the concept” of income caps, Leerink analyst Whit Mayo wrote within the note to clients, but he added that it’s getting late to seek out a revised solution.Â
“Modified caps could meaningfully reduce the value tag of a probable 1-2 12 months fix. We’re unsure if there’s actually time to implement a lot of those changes.”Â
ACA open enrollment on the federal health exchange ends Dec. 15.
Be at liberty to send any suggestions, suggestions, story ideas and data to Bertha at bertha.coombs@versantmedia.com.
