Two days after Sanofi-Aventis tersely announced that the FDA was holding up approval of weight-loss drug Acomplia (rimonabant), the French pharmaceutical giant selectively disclosed to favored analysts "a crucial piece of intelligence about the drug's future prospects," according to a report in the Wall Street Journal.

Sanofi's investor-relations department took calls on Feb. 19 from research analysts who follow the company closely, the newspaper reported, and told them Sanofi expected the drug to be approved by the FDA "in months, not years."

Sanofi did not provide this same information to the media and the public until five days later on Feb. 24th.

The newspaper said Sanofi officials contacted the same weekend the company was whispering in the ear of favored analysts responded with "no comment" and declined to provide this information to The Wall Street Journal. Sanofi media spokespersons also did not respond to emails from Medical Week News, publisher of the Acomplia Report.

While we do not view Sanofi's latest rosy view about the prospects for early approval of Acomplia as a "crucial piece of intelligence," the Journal correctly points out that this could have been of considerable importance to investors, who may have made decisions to buy or sell without the benefit of information that Sanofi was passing on to certain analysts and their clients.

"Such delays usually are signs of a potential violation of Regulation Fair Disclosure, a rule put in place by the Securities and Exchange Commission in 2000 to guard against companies making selective disclosure to favored parties. Companies that release significant information are supposed to tell everybody at the same time," the Journal reported.

"Sanofi, however, may not have to play by those rules, even though its shares trade in New York as American depositary receipts, as well as in Paris. U.S. securities lawyers point to an exemption in so-called Reg FD disclosure requirements for foreign private issuers, or companies whose shareholders, assets and sales are predominately based outside the U.S. Sanofi would appear to meet those criteria," the newspaper added.

A spokesman for the Securities and Exchange Commission declined to comment.

Apparently Sanofi saw no need to provide these "answers in a consistent manner" to the media.