Novo Nordisk Takes Eli Lilly to Court Over GLP-1 Advertising Claims
Novo filed the complaint in the US District Court for the District of New Jersey. The company alleges that Lilly violated the Lanham Act and state false-advertising and unfair-competition laws. According to Novo, Lilly continued the campaigns after receiving a cease-and-desist letter and did not make a meaningful correction.
However, Eli Lilly rejected the accusation. The company told Reuters that it stands behind the advertisements because they reflect results from the SURMOUNT-5 trial. Lilly also said it will defend the lawsuit.
Why Wegovy and Zepbound Dose Comparisons Raise Compliance Concerns
The first dispute involves advertisements that compare Zepbound at maximum tolerated doses of 10 mg or 15 mg with Wegovy at 1.7 mg or 2.4 mg. Novo argues that the campaign omits the 7.2 mg injectable Wegovy dose, which the FDA approved in March 2026.
Moreover, Novo states that no head-to-head trial has compared the highest approved doses of Zepbound and Wegovy. Therefore, the company claims that Lilly’s campaign creates an impression of broad superiority without presenting the latest clinical context. Lilly, meanwhile, maintains that the advertisements accurately communicate the SURMOUNT-5 findings.
New Wegovy 7.2 mg Evidence Raises the Stakes for Lilly’s Campaign
The STEP UP trial evaluated once-weekly Wegovy 7.2 mg in adults with obesity and without diabetes. After 72 weeks, participants who received the higher dose achieved an average body-weight reduction of 18.8%, compared with 3.9% among participants who received placebo.
As a result, Novo argues that advertisements based only on older Wegovy doses no longer present the full evidence available to consumers. The complaint also challenges a Lilly campaign that compares Mounjaro 15 mg with Ozempic 1 mg without mentioning the FDA-approved 2 mg Ozempic maintenance dose.
Novo Seeks to Remove and Correct Lilly’s National GLP-1 Ads
Novo wants the court to order Lilly to remove the disputed advertisements from all platforms. In addition, the company seeks a corrective advertising campaign and damages linked to profits that Lilly allegedly gained through the campaigns.
Novo also plans to request a preliminary injunction if Lilly does not withdraw the advertisements voluntarily. Such an order could force Lilly to change or stop the campaigns before the court reaches a final decision. However, the lawsuit currently presents allegations, and the court has not ruled that Lilly’s advertising violated the law.
What the Lawsuit Reveals About Pharmaceutical Advertising Compliance
The dispute shows how quickly new approvals and clinical evidence can change the context around pharmaceutical claims. Therefore, companies need controlled review processes that keep promotional content aligned with current labels, approved doses, and supporting studies.
Moreover, teams must review active campaigns whenever regulators approve a new dose or important clinical evidence becomes available. Strong change control and quality governance can help companies identify outdated claims before they create legal, regulatory, or reputational exposure.
Zamann Pharma’s Quality Management System service helps pharmaceutical teams strengthen change control, risk management, CAPA, and routine quality oversight. Explore the service to develop a more structured and sustainable approach to compliance governance.
Source: Pharmexec.Com