 Dr.Shruti Bhat, Star formulator and Ace leader within pharmaceutical R&D,a specialist with hiTech formulations and quality-by-design. Shruti brings to you some highlights from current pharma and clinical research news, views and data. A lineup of blockbuster monoclonal antibodies produced by a group of the world's top biopharma companies are now squarely in the crosshairs of the world's top biosimilar developers.Last Friday the European Medicines Agency laid out exactly what developers will need to do to gain approvals for follow-on antibody therapies. And Roche, with its lineup of aging cancer therapies like Rituxan, Herceptin and Avastin, was quickly singled out as the most vulnerable to a new lineup of competitive treatments that could hit the European market as early as 2012. The Financial Times also notes that Merck KGaA, Johnson & Johnson ($JNJ) and Abbott ($ABT) also face near-term competition from the biosimilar crowd. GlaxoSmithKline ($GSK) and AstraZeneca ($AZN) are likely to face new competition at a later stage.Several big outfits like Novartis ($NVS), Teva and Hospira ($HSP) are likely to lead the charge in creating biosimilar versions of the blockbuster antibodies. But it won't be cheap. The research group Collins Stewart has estimated that developers will need to budget $100 million for the kinds of clinical trials that will be required to gain an approval. And once they hit the market, the follow-ons are expected to offer discounts of 10 to 15 percent. Roche wants regulators to be cautious and slow. "We believe that patient safety must be of highest concern when evaluating the development, approval and marketing of biosimilar products." In the U.S., the FDA is just beginning the process of laying out the rules for developing biosimilars.EU adopts new biosimilar guideline :European regulators have adopted a guideline on biosimilar antibody drugs; industry can expect its publication in a couple of weeks. However, many experts already anticipate a cautious approach, requiring separate clinical trials for different diseases addressed by the same antibody, as Reuters notes.In a release, the EMA briefly touched on the guidelines, titled 'Similar Biological Medicinal Products Containing Monoclonal Antibodies,' which will be released for a five-month public consultation period. "This guideline lays down the nonclinical and clinical requirements for monoclonal antibody-containing medicines claiming to be similar to another one already marketed," it explains.Earlier this week, Lincoln Tsang, a partner at London law firm Arnold & Porter, told Reuters he expects the EMA to play it safe by requiring extensive testing. "My hunch is that they will be cautious in saying that if you can establish clinical efficacy and safety of a given product for a given indication you can't readily seek approval for another indication," he said. "Given it is such a big therapeutic area, I think they will not like to be seen to be too generous." As Reuters notes, such testing could drive up the costs of producing biosimilars, thus making it hard for smaller companies to enter the arena. If costs are too high, only well-established players like Teva, Novartis and Hospira might have the ability to bring such products to market.http://www.pharm-education.com/2010/11/blockbuster-antibodies-now-face-quick.html Disclaimer- The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances. Http://www.drshrutibhat.com Expert at leading Pharmaceutical R&D.Translates innovative concepts to PROFITS.YouTube Channel : Http://www.youtube.com/user/ShrutiBhat10
 Dr.Shruti Bhat, Star formulator and Ace leader within pharmaceutical R&D. Shruti is a specialist with hiTech formulations, pharmaceutical patents and quality-by-design. Shruti brings to you some highlights from current pharmaceutical and clinical research news, views and data.
Recently, there has been an increase in so-called "scams" involving apparent IP-related companies sending misleading letters to applicants and owners of IP rights in an attempt to extract money from those persons. A number of official intellectual property organisations, including the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO), have recognised this issue and distributed warnings against these scams.Often these scam letters take the appearance of invoices requesting the applicant/owner to pay for services that are essentially worthless. Examples include offers or invoices for registering patents or trade marks in international registers and offers for patent and trade mark monitoring services.These companies obtain their targets' details from official registers where details of their patent, trade mark or application are published, often together with the applicant/owners personal details. The companies use e-mails, fake websites, faxes and telephone numbers to give the appearance of a legitimate IP-related organisation.In a recent example, late last year, a Florida-based company had been found to have violated the state's Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act by sending misleading invoices requesting payment for essentially worthless IP-related services. This company, trading as "Federated Institute for Patent and Trademark Registry", was found to have distributed misleading invoices to patent and trade mark applicants, including applicants of international Patent Cooperation Treaty patent applications.This victory is a small step towards combating this deceptive practice. However, recently, WIPO has witnessed a rise in the number of IP related scams. IP Australia has also advised that they occasionally receive notification of similar instances.To combat this issue, if you are an owner or applicant of a patent or trade mark, you should question correspondence from unfamiliar organisations offering services such as those mentioned above. Typically, the only organisations sending IP-related correspondence to applicants/owners of IP rights should be their legal representatives such as patent or trade mark attorneys, the official intellectual property offices such as WIPO and IP Australia, and Computer Patent Annuities (CPA), which is an organisation involved in managing renewal fees for patents and patent applications.If you are unsure of the origin or intention of a certain piece of correspondence, particularly if that correspondence requests money, you should contact us to ascertain the legitimacy of the party concerned. IP Australia and WIPO have issued lists of companies reported to have distributed unsolicited communications. The WIPO list also includes examples of the misleading correspondence sent by each listed organisation. These lists can be found at the following addresses.http://www.ipaustralia.gov.au/factsheets/unsolicited_ip.shtml http://www.wipo.int/pct/en/warning/pct_warning.htm Disclaimer- The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances. http://www.pharmaceuticalpatentsandintellectualproperty.com/2010/11/australia-not-all-patent-protection-is.html Http://www.drshrutibhat.com Expert at leading Pharmaceutical R&D.Translates innovative concepts to PROFITS.YouTube Channel : Http://www.youtube.com/user/ShrutiBhat10Do you have questions for the author?
 Dr.Shruti Bhat, Star formulator and Ace leader within pharmaceutical R&D. Shruti is a specialist with hiTech formulations, pharmaceutical patents and quality-by-design. Shruti brings to you some highlights from current pharmaceutical and clinical research news, views and data. The Italian Medicines Agency (AIFA) has issued new guidelines on its future policy on the disclosure of generics (Gxs) applications.AIFA stated that "further to consultations with Italian and European institutions, as well as the industry and the Italian courts" (presumably the Italian administrative courts where cases were recently brought by leading pharmaceutical companies), AIFA has decided to change the procedure whereby AIFA will process patent holders' requests for information on Marketing Authorisation (MA) applications filed by generics manufacturers.Further, AIFA will publish a list of all the active substances for which MA applications have been filed in accordance with Article 10(1) and 10(3) of Directive 2001/83/EC. According to AIFA, publishing that list will meet the requirements of the Italian Freedom of Information Act (Law 241/1990), according to which affected third parties are entitled to be informed of any administrative procedure being commenced.AIFA has decided that it will not authorise the disclosure of Gxs files to patent holders before the completion of the regulatory procedure, unless exceptional circumstances require otherwise. In particular, for medicinals that are not reimbursed by the National Health Service, such disclosures will be authorised only once the opinion of the Scientific Commission has been submitted. In terms of medicinals that are reimbursed, disclosures will be authorised once price negotiations have been completed. In essence, this will mean that disclosure of Gxs files will be authorised at the very end of the regulatory process, i.e. just before Gxs MAs are published in the Official Gazette.AIFA has gone on to confirm that it will be adhering to recent case law by the Supreme Administrative Court whereby it judged that the existence of patent rights is irrelevant in terms of including approved Gxs in the reimbursement list.The List of Active Substances :AIFA did not clarify whether the list of active substances for which article 10 (1) or 10 (3) MA applications are filed will include just the active substances or the names of the actual generics manufacturers filing the MA applications as well. The first list for new MA applications filed for September 2010 was published online on 7 October: http://www.agenziafarmaco.it/it/content/lista-sostanze-attive . The list indicates the relevant active substances, the type of procedure (national, mutual recognition or centralised/decentralised) and the number of MA applications filed for each active substance. The identity of the Gxs manufacturers is not revealed.What will this mean?In the past, AIFA's reaction to requests made by right holders (under the Freedom of Information Act) for the disclosure of Gxs applications was to send the relevant generics manufacturer a letter asking if it objected to such request. A copy of such letter was also sent to the patent holder and the right holder was thus officially informed of the identity of the Gxs manufacturer filing the MA application.Under the new procedure – assuming that AIFA will not include the names of the Gxs manufacturers in the next lists – it may become increasingly harder for right holders to be officially informed of who is filing Gxs applications. As a result, the new AIFA procedure may well be seen to be breaching the Freedom of Information Act.On a more positive note, since 7 October 2010, patent holders are able to monitor MA submissions by active substances in Italy using an online tool.Disclaimer- The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances. http://www.pharmaceuticalpatentsandintellectualproperty.com/2010/11/italy-disclosing-generics-applications.html
New cancer drugs are a top priority for most pharmaceutical companies these days, but the sector's sales trajectory has flattened as key medicines lose patent protection and new breakthrough products prove scarce.
U.S. sales of oncology drugs increased just 3.5 percent in the first nine months of this year, according to pharmaceutical market information company IMS Health.
The sector saw sales growth of 23 percent in 2006, after Roche Holding AG's Avastin was launched. It grew by 14 percent in 2007 and 9 percent in both 2008 and 2009.
"This is an unprecedented slowdown," IMS representatives said at the Reuters Health Summit. "Growth is largely being driven by pricing increases," as well as the entrance of lower-cost generic drugs. Read more...
http://www.pharm-education.com/2010/11/cancer-drug-sales-fast-sliding-35-in.html
|