BMS sets UK price for schizophrenia drug in line with US amid calls to recognize the value of innovation

Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS) has announced that its new schizophrenia drug, Cobenfy, will be priced in the UK at the same level as in the US. The action marks a first for the company and highlights the pressures shaping international drug pricing and access to innovation.

Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS) has taken the unusual step of saying that its new schizophrenia drug, Cobenfy, will be sold in the UK at the same list price as in the US. The move, the first of its kind for the company, highlights international pressures around drug pricing and raises questions for the UK’s cost-effectiveness frameworks.

This is the first time BMS has set identical list prices in both markets and represents a rare disclosure ahead of a UK regulatory filing. The company intends to submit a marketing authorization application to the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) in the coming weeks via the International Recognition Procedure, a route designed to accelerate access to innovative medicines. A review by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) will follow, with a UK launch expected in 2026 if approved.

The pricing decision comes at a time of heightened debate about how new medicines are valued in the UK. Guy Oliver, General Manager of BMS UK, said the company is, “committed to working with the NHS, NICE and other authorities to make this medicine available to all eligible UK patients,” but stressed the need for reform. “We therefore call on the Government to collaborate with the life sciences sector to increase investment in new medicines and fully recognize the value that innovation brings to patients, society, and the UK’s long-term prosperity,” he said.

Adam Lenkowsky, BMS’s Chief Commercialisation Officer, told the Financial Times that the company could halt the UK launch if NICE does not recommend the drug. “If we need to, we are prepared to make the difficult decision to walk away if NICE cannot recognize the value of our medicine,” he said. He added that, “we do agree with the Trump administration that in fact other countries need to pay their fair share for innovation.”

Industry observers have noted the unusual timing of BMS’s announcement. Health policy analyst Neil Grubert questioned whether the move, coming weeks before the UK marketing authorization application is filed, was intended primarily to send a signal to the Trump administration. He also highlighted the central question for NICE’s review: “Will the company be willing to offer NICE a confidential discount to meet the institute’s cost-effectiveness threshold? If not, the threat to walk away might quickly be put to the test.”

These comments link to wider global pricing pressures. The Trump administration advanced a “Most Favoured Nation” (MFN) policy aimed at tying US drug prices to the lowest charged abroad. In July 2025, US officials wrote to 17 pharmaceutical CEOs urging them to align international prices or face federal action and setting a deadline for action September 29, 2025. As reported previously by The Evidence Base, US policymakers have long argued that Americans shoulder a disproportionate share of the costs of innovation compared with Europe.

For patients, Cobenfy’s availability in the UK will depend on whether NICE deems the treatment cost-effective at the proposed price. If approved, it could provide a new option for people living with schizophrenia, though its cost may place additional strain on NHS budgets. For the industry, the announcement signals a willingness to challenge long-standing UK pricing norms and could set a precedent for future launches.

The outcome of NICE’s review will be closely followed as a test case for how global pricing strategies intersect with national cost-effectiveness frameworks, and for how governments and industry balance affordability with the recognition of pharmaceutical innovation. With the end of the September deadline approaching, attention will turn to how other pharmaceutical companies respond – and whether BMS’s move signals the start of broader shifts in international pricing strategies.