Legal

Genentech seeks to block the marketing of Samsung Bioepis’ proposed bevacizumab biosimilar, saying the company infringed multiple patents when submitting an FDA approval application.

In upholding a lower court ruling, a federal circuit court has decided that Amgen gave enough notice prior to launching its bevacizumab biosimilar. The court decision has frustrated an attempt by Genentech to block sales of the product.

Republican opponents of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), led by the state of Texas, fired opening salvos in the Supreme Court case over the landmark law's constitutionality. If the entire law is thrown out, approval for biosimilars under the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (BPCIA) would disappear, too.

The judge in the Humira case, while noting that the patents have made it nearly impossible for rivals to gain a foothold, said the suit did not constitute a valid antitrust claim.

Among the briefs filed in defense of the Affordable Care Act and, with it, the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (BPCIA), is one from the Association for Accessible Medicines, which argues the BPCIA is vital to biosimilars market development.

Australia’s secretive drug approval system gives what some believe is an unfair advantage to rival drug companies.

Trying to carve back its market share for Neupogen, its filgrastim originator product, Amgen is hoping product exclusivity can be backdated.

European investigators say their analysis of court cases involving innovator monoclonal antibodies suggests secondary patents have generally failed to stop biosimilar competition.

Taking an abundance of time to file a motion to block Kanjinti from coming to market, Genentech unwittingly may have tipped the scales in favor of biosimilar applicants.

Ha Kung Wong, JD, a patent law attorney with Venable of New York, New York, discusses recent regulatory actions to promote biosimilars.

The Center for Biosimilars® recaps the top stories for the week of March 30, 2020.

Life under the new biologics pathway will be easier for some drugs than others, notes Stacie L. Ropka, PhD, JD, a patent attorney with Axinn, Veltrop & Harkrider LLP, in Hartford, Connecticut.

Seen up close, many patents are not truly strong enough to block biosimilar commercialization, although patents filed after FDA approval of originator products can bar access to modern manufacturing methods, according to Hans Sauer, deputy general counsel and vice president for intellectual property at the Biotechnology Innovation Organization (BIO).

The Supreme Court will hear an appeal by a coalition of 20 mainly Democratic states, which are hoping for a reversal of a Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that held the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) individual mandate is unconstitutional and called into question whether the remaining provisions of the law could still stand. However, a decision will not come until after the November 2020 presidential election.

Depending on the outcome, 3 major biosimilar antitrust actions, as well as a related Federal Trade Commission investigation, could significantly change how biologics are priced.

Antitrust claims are a product of federal statute, said the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, in reinstating a Walgreens and Kroger antitrust lawsuit against J&J over its branded infliximab, Remicade.

The orphan drug market could see hefty biosimilar competition, based on revenue potential, and patent struggles need to be resolved before some biosimilars can come to market, according to a speaker reviewing the 2020 pipeline at the Specialty Therapies and Biosimilars Congress.

Panelists at the 2020 Specialty Therapies and Biosimilars Congress discussed the strategies needed to get biosimilars to market and overcome obstacles by originator product manufacturers.

It’s important to keep in mind the successive patents that can be filed to keep an original product in a position of market dominance, and drug descriptions in biologic license applications can be written cleverly to achieve this aim, according to a panelist speaking at the Specialty Therapies and Biosimilars Conference, happening January 22-24, 2020, in Miami, Florida.

In the United States, recent analyses show that biosimilars achieved just 9%, or $91 million, of the $1 billion in cost savings that the Congressional Budget Office projected 10 years ago.

The Center for Biosimilars® recaps the top stories for the week of January 6.

The law made California the first state to bar pay-for-delay pharmaceutical agreements by making them presumptively anticompetitive if the nonreference drug maker receives anything of value from the other company.

Cases involving adalimumab featured in 2 of the 5 top legal stories in 2019 that dealt with various legal matters, including charges of patent thicketing.

This week, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court decision against Pfizer subsidiary Hospira related to an epoetin alfa biosimilar.

The Federal Circuit, in Arthrex, Inc v Smith & Nephew, Inc, ruled that the appointment of Administrative Patent Judges (APJs) at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) violated the Appointments Clause of the US Constitution, and held that APJs could be removed from office without cause. Absent a dramatic ideological shift in the PTAB, however, this decision likely will have little impact on how follow-on biologics developers use inter partes review (IPR).

Coherus BioSciences and Amgen have reportedly settled a patent lawsuit over biosimilar adalimumab.

Roche’s Japan-based subsidiary, Chugai Pharmaceutical, has filed a new patent infringement suit against Alexion in the District Court of Delaware.

Given how markets operate, pharmaceutical companies need financial incentives in order to keep providing a reliable stream of high-quality products that otherwise, due to low prices and other factors, might fall into shortage, according to an FDA report about the drug shortages problem released this week.

A bipartisan bill to require patent transparency in an effort to bring down the cost of prescription drugs has been introduced in the House of Representatives; the bill is a piece of companion legislation to one introduced in the Senate in March.

On Friday, Humana filed a lawsuit in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, alleging that 37 defendants engaged in a “far-reaching conspiracy” to “blatantly fix the price” of generic drugs.