Curtis Hernandez
U.S. lawmakers have opened national security investigations into Merck and AbbVie over their clinical trial work in China, focusing on whether trials run at facilities tied to the Chinese military or located in Xinjiang put sensitive biotech data and American patients at risk. The probes, led by a bipartisan House committee, arrived in the form of letters dated Monday and sent to both drugmakers' chief executives.
At a Glance
- Rep. John Moolenaar's House Select Committee on China sent letters to Merck and AbbVie demanding answers by July 17.
- Merck has run 224 clinical studies in China since 2005, including 31 in Xinjiang and 40 at military linked hospitals.
- AbbVie has conducted more than 100 studies in China since 2007, with 17 in Xinjiang and 16 tied to the military.
- Neither company is accused of breaking any law, but lawmakers cite ethical and security concerns.
- China's share of early stage global drug development jumped from 8% in 2015 to over 32% in 2024.
What the Letters Actually Say
The letters, signed by Moolenaar and addressed to AbbVie's Robert Michael and Merck's Robert Davis, ask the companies to explain how they choose trial sites in China, how they safeguard patient and research data, and what steps they take to ensure ethical standards are met. Lawmakers want detailed answers by mid July.
Notably, the committee stopped short of alleging any wrongdoing. Both letters state plainly that neither company is known to have violated any law. Instead, the concern is framed around risk: running trials inside hospitals connected to the Chinese military, the letters argue, could expose valuable American biotech intellectual property to transfer into military hands, whether intentional or not.
Why Xinjiang Matters Here
The letters single out Xinjiang for a reason that goes beyond biotech. The region is where Beijing has carried out what the letters describe as a genocide against Uyghurs and other ethnic and religious minorities. Lawmakers point to documented cases where Chinese researchers failed to properly obtain informed consent from trial participants, raising questions about whether patients enrolled in these studies fully understood what they were agreeing to.
That combination, trials in a region under such intense human rights scrutiny plus reported consent failures, is what elevates this from a routine oversight letter into something with real reputational stakes for both drugmakers.
How the Companies Are Responding
Merck says patient safety and ethical conduct sit at the center of its clinical research program and that its trials follow global guidelines regardless of location. AbbVie has not addressed the investigation directly. China's embassy in Washington pushed back hard, with a spokesperson saying there is nothing credible behind the committee's action and accusing the U.S. of politicizing trade and technology matters.
The Bigger Picture in Biotech Competition
These investigations don't exist in isolation. They reflect a broader anxiety in Washington about how quickly China has climbed the ranks in drug development. Data cited in the committee's findings shows China's share of early stage global drug development rose from 8% in 2015 to more than 32% by 2024. Over that same stretch, the U.S. share fell from 48% to roughly 37%.
That shift helps explain why lawmakers are paying closer attention to where American pharmaceutical giants run their trials. Last year, President Trump signed the Biosecure Act, which restricts federal agencies from doing business with biotech companies based outside the U.S., a sign that concerns about biotech supply chains and data security have been building for a while.
Where AbbVie Stands Financially
AbbVie's newer immunology drugs, Skyrizi and Rinvoq, have become the company's growth engines as its longtime blockbuster Humira lost ground to biosimilar competitors. The investigation lands at a moment when AbbVie is leaning heavily on its China based and global trial networks to keep its drug pipeline moving.
Frequently Asked Questions
Have Merck or AbbVie been accused of breaking any laws?
No. The congressional letters explicitly state that neither company is known to have violated any law. The investigation centers on risk and oversight, not confirmed wrongdoing.
How many clinical trials are actually in question?
Merck has conducted 224 clinical studies in China since 2005, with 31 in Xinjiang and 40 at military linked facilities. AbbVie has run more than 100 studies since 2007, including 17 in Xinjiang and 16 at military connected sites.
What is the Biosecure Act and how does it relate to this?
The Biosecure Act, signed into law in 2024, limits federal agencies from doing business with non U.S. biotechnology companies. It reflects the same broader concern driving this investigation: safeguarding American biotech interests from Chinese influence.
What happens after July 17?
That is the deadline the committee set for Merck and AbbVie to submit their responses. What the committee does with that information, whether it leads to further hearings, legislation, or no action at all, remains to be seen.
What Comes Next
Congress has given both companies a firm deadline, but the underlying tension here won't resolve quickly. As China's role in early stage drug research keeps expanding, American pharmaceutical companies will likely face more scrutiny over exactly where and how they conduct trials abroad, regardless of whether any laws were broken this time around.
Dean Porter
Douglas Turner