A pair of rivals developing drugs for common retinal diseases are not seeing eye to eye.
EyePoint on Friday filed a lawsuit in Massachusetts Superior Court accusing Ocular Therapeutix of engaging in a “malicious campaign” against EyePoint.
EyePoint is currently developing the intravitreal insert Duravyu for wet age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and diabetic macular edema, while Ocular’s Axpaxli hydrogel is in phase 3 trials for wet AMD and diabetic retinopathy. Both companies have recently ramped up preparations for their anticipated launches by hiring commercial chiefs in the first weeks of 2026.
In the lawsuit (PDF), EyePoint accused Ocular of attempting to “damage EyePoint’s reputation and cause it competitive harm by making blatantly false and defamatory statements” about both the company and Duravyu, with an alleged goal of improving Ocular and Axpaxli’s standing by comparison.
In a statement sent to Fierce Pharma Marketing, Ocular painted the filing as an attack on its own drug, which it suggested “will cause significant competitive disruption to products on the market and in development for retinal vascular diseases.”
“Remember, no other novel mechanism has ever demonstrated superiority to anti-VEGF in an FDA-aligned Phase 3 study,” the statement continued, pointing to recently released topline data in which Axpaxli outperformed Regeneron’s Eylea.
“It is unfortunate that EyePoint has chosen to file a lawsuit against Ocular rather than answering the community’s questions about EyePoint’s own data and disclosures. We believe this is little more than an attempt to distract and detract from our successful Phase 3 superiority trial. Ultimately, we believe the data speak for themselves,” Ocular continued. “We stand by our statements and look forward to responding to EyePoint’s allegations in the course of the legal process.”
EyePoint wrote in the lawsuit that Ocular has disseminated “false information, baseless rumors, and misleading claims” about EyePoint for years, but that it ramped up the alleged campaign last month.
At that time, according to EyePoint, Ocular began sharing a “false and misleading” comparison of Duravyu and Axpaxli’s respective safety data in presentations, public comments and printed handouts.
The comparison is allegedly based on “altered data, omitted information, and outright invented assertions” to make Axpaxli look comparatively safer than Duravyu, contrary to industry analysts’ conclusions. EyePoint said it has twice notified Ocular that its statements are false, but its competitor “has steadfastly refused to retract or correct its misinformation—and, indeed, it persists in disseminating it.”
EyePoint is suing Ocular on counts of defamation, commercial disparagement, violations of Massachusetts’ consumer protection law and interference with EyePoint’s current and future business relations. The company is asking the court to stop Ocular from sharing false and misleading statements about Duravyu’s clinical results and to force Ocular to issue an EyePoint-approved public retraction of its previous statements, in addition to a request for damages of an unspecified amount.