White & Case's Global Antitrust Practice hosted the fifth annual GCR Live: Antitrust in the Life Sciences Conference at the firm's New York office on October 29, 2025. The full-day program brought together antitrust specialists, economists, academics, and recent enforcers to discuss the rapidly evolving intersection of competition policy, innovation, and life sciences markets.
Partner Rahul Rao chaired the event and opened the day with a wide-ranging conversation on the state of antitrust enforcement in the United States. Partner Kristen O'Shaughnessy joined a panel on the use of AI and algorithmic pricing in life sciences. White & Case attorneys attended and contributed to discussions throughout the day.
A few key themes emerged across panels on merger enforcement, PBMs and pricing, and the growing role of AI in life sciences R&D.
Setting the Stage: Enforcement, Innovation, and Access
The day began with a fireside chat featuring Rahul Rao, who oversaw pharma and life sciences merger and conduct enforcement as Deputy Director of the FTC's Bureau of Competition before joining White & Case. The conversation framed the program's central theme: the evolution of life sciences competition policy from case-by-case enforcement to broader structural questions around access and innovation.
- From enforcement to influence. Rao discussed how, during his time at the FTC, enforcement increasingly sought to shape market behavior through a range of tools—from litigation to policy statements and warning letters—reflecting a broader focus on deterrence and market signaling.
- Speed and flexibility as enforcement tools. The conversation highlighted initiatives such as the FTC's Orange Book warning letters as examples of faster, high-impact interventions that disciplined markets without protracted litigation.
- Continuity amid change. Discussing current trends, Rao emphasized that while tone and rhetoric may differ under new leadership, the core issues around pharmaceuticals—drug pricing, PBM structures, and access barriers—remain constant. The market itself has grown more integrated and data-driven, making speed and coordination even more critical for enforcers.
- Looking ahead. Rao predicted that "the next wave of enforcement is going to follow the data," pointing to algorithmic contracting, rebate optimization tools, and biosimilar access as the frontiers where efficiency and coordination may blur. These themes resonated across subsequent panels, which explored how evolving contracting practices, data flows, and portfolio strategies are shaping both deal planning and access dynamics.
1. Life Sciences M&A: Evolution, Not Revolution
Panelists observed that expectations of a sharp shift under the new U.S. administration have not materialized. Instead, the enforcement approach reflects an evolution of prior policies.
- Novel theories and creative remedies continue. Antitrust considerations remain central to deal planning, with regulators maintaining a focus on innovation-related theories of harm. Parties are responding with increasingly proactive remedies, including early-stage licensing and pre-commitments. Acceptability, however, remains deal-specific and contested, with structural divestitures typically favored by enforcers over purely behavioral commitments.
- Different trajectories abroad. In the U.K., regulators have placed an emphasis on economic growth alongside continued, targeted CMA scrutiny of global deals with local effects. While in the EU, policymakers are reviewing merger guidance with a renewed focus on how merger control interacts with broader goals of competitiveness, innovation, and the global scale of EU companies.
- Balancing innovation and enforcement. Panelists discussed so-called "killer acquisitions," and emphasized that acquisitions of early-stage biotech firms often provide the capital needed to advance promising therapies, underscoring the need for sector-specific analysis. At the same time, enforcers remain alert to potential pipeline steering or suppression of nascent threats, so parties should substantiate innovation benefits and address future competition concerns.
2. AI, Data, and Algorithmic Pricing
A second session turned to the opportunities and risks presented by AI in pricing and R&D—an area in which White & Case Partner Kristen O'Shaughnessy shared her insights.
- Algorithms are not new—but their implications are expanding. While pricing software has existed for decades, generative AI has amplified both its speed and reach. Risks remain highest in concentrated markets with transparent pricing and shared vendor data.
- Lessons from recent litigation. Courts have begun distinguishing between parallel use of pricing tools and evidence of coordinated adoption or "enforcement" of algorithmic recommendations. Compliance takeaway: using common pricing tools is not itself unlawful—risk turns on coordinated adoption or enforcement of recommendations and the sharing of competitively sensitive inputs.
- AI as an R&D accelerator. Machine learning is now integral to drug discovery, clinical-trial design, and target identification. AI has a potential flattening effect that may lower barriers to competition from smaller firms. Panelists agreed that potential antitrust concerns—such as "data as an essential facility" or "market allocation by AI"—are highly fact-specific, and, for now, remain largely theoretical.
- Governance and compliance. Companies were encouraged to audit third-party tools, understand data inputs and outputs, and establish clear internal policies governing AI use in pricing and research.
3. PBMs and the Cost of Access
The final panel examined ongoing scrutiny of pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) and their influence over drug pricing and market access.
- Continued regulatory attention. The FTC's expansive 6(b) study—one of the most detailed in recent years—drew both praise and criticism. Panelists debated whether the report fully accounts for PBMs' role in controlling overall healthcare costs. PBMs' function in managing drug spending contributed to divergent views on how best to evaluate their competitive impact. Discussion also touched on the FTC's use of Section 5—prohibiting "unfair methods of competition"—reflecting a view that certain contracting and formulary practices may fall outside traditional antitrust theories.
- Rebate structures under the microscope. "Rebate walls" and bundled discounts can produce both efficiencies and exclusionary effects, depending on the market context. Panelists highlighted the tension between patient-level benefits and exclusion risks to rival manufacturers.
- Patent thickets and Orange Book listings. Speakers disagreed on whether these areas remain fertile ground for enforcement and private litigation, noting the legal and causation hurdles inherent in challenging valid patents. Discussions also touched on how large or complex patent portfolios can shape competitive dynamics and entry timing. However, consistent with the program's theme of speed and flexibility, agencies are increasingly using faster, non litigation tools (e.g., warning letters) to address alleged listing abuses and access barriers. Panelists differed on the durability of these theories going forward, with some seeing room for continued agency focus and others highlighting the practical challenges in tying specific portfolio or listing practices to delayed entry.
Key Takeaways
Across discussions, panelists emphasized continuity over disruption in global merger enforcement, ongoing attention to PBMs and pricing structures, and growing interest in how AI and data shape competition in life sciences.
Our Global Antitrust Practice has deep experience helping pharmaceutical and life sciences clients navigate M&A, market access strategies, and R&D within an increasingly complex legal and regulatory landscape. We closely monitor developments across competition and healthcare policy, and our cross-practice Life Sciences and Healthcare Industry Group enables us to provide coordinated, commercially focused advice that reflects the broader dynamics of this evolving sector.
White & Case means the international legal practice comprising White & Case LLP, a New York State registered limited liability partnership, White & Case LLP, a limited liability partnership incorporated under English law and all other affiliated partnerships, companies and entities.
This article is prepared for the general information of interested persons. It is not, and does not attempt to be, comprehensive in nature. Due to the general nature of its content, it should not be regarded as legal advice.
© 2025 White & Case LLP
