Lilly's obesity pill records modest second week as battle with Novo intensifies

By Sriparna Roy

April 24 (Reuters) – Eli Lilly’s newly launched weight-loss pill had a modest second week, analysts said on Friday, as competition with ‌Danish rival Novo Nordisk heats up in the oral obesity drug market.

The ‌pill, launched earlier this month as Foundayo, was prescribed 3,707 times in the U.S. in the week ended April 17, IQVIA data shared by Wall Street analysts showed, up from 1,390 in its debut week.

Novo’s Wegovy pill, launched in January, had clocked 18,410 prescriptions in its second week and 3,071 in the first four days after launch.

Analysts would have liked ‌to see Foundayo’s second-week prescriptions ⁠closer to around 8,000 “to show that its relative spread to the oral Wegovy launch was at least being maintained,” said Deutsche ⁠Bank analyst James Shin.

RBC Capital Markets analyst Trung Huynh said while comparisons close to launch “should be considered immaterial, Foundayo’s uptake this week is likely to be received negatively.”

Lilly shares were trading nearly 4% lower, while U.S.-listed Novo shares were about 6% higher.

Foundayo prescriptions, totaling ‌just 20% of what oral Wegovy achieved during its first full week, were “modest,” noted Truist analyst Srikripa Devarakonda.

SLOWER RAMP

Investors are closely watching the rollout as a key test of whether Lilly can gain market share from Novo, which has had a first-mover advantage in the oral weight-loss drug market.

The prescription numbers represent a somewhat slower ‌ramp compared to oral Wegovy, said J.P. Morgan analyst Chris Schott, adding that this was not surprising given Wegovy’s advantages in time-to-market and brand recognition.

Foundayo was approved in the U.S. on April ‌1, with prescriptions accepted immediately on LillyDirect, while shipping started on April 6. Broad availability through U.S. retail pharmacies and telehealth providers began on April 9.

Lilly previously cautioned that early weekly figures would not be fully comprehensive, may not capture ‌the full breadth of pharmacy partners and would be “best interpreted over time rather than as a complete count.”

(Reporting by Sriparna Roy in Bengaluru; Editing by Tasim Zahid and Jonathan Ananda)