of 26
8/7/2019 Biologics Patent Protection
1/26
8/7/2019 Biologics Patent Protection
2/26
2
Introduction Introduction of the concept of patent
life cycle management Insights from the pharma industry Key patentability issues in patent
life cycle management The role of formulations in biologics
patent protection Case Studies
Erythropoietin Growth hormone
8/7/2019 Biologics Patent Protection
3/26
3
The Dilemma The cost to develop a drug or biologic and bring
to market is hundreds of millions of $$$
Patent protection for the basic NCE or protein isgenerally sought very early in the R&D process
Due to the extensive regulatory review period,significant patent term has been lost by the timethe product goes to market
8/7/2019 Biologics Patent Protection
4/26
4
Patent Life-Cycle Management Strategic use of patents to
maintain product exclusivity andrevenue stream over life of blockbuster drug or biologic
Involves obtaining additionalpatents that extend protectionbeyond the original patentscovering the NCE or biologic per se
8/7/2019 Biologics Patent Protection
5/26
5
Insights from the Pharma Industry Patent life-cycle management is a
familiar concept for big pharma Hatch-Waxman Act
Recognizes regulatory delay
Allows innovator to extend patent term of single patent up to 5 years
BUT, provides for generic entry immediatelyupon expiration of patent coverage
Generics often seek to market uponexpiration of original patent to NCE
8/7/2019 Biologics Patent Protection
6/26
6
Insights from Pharma Industry Pharma companies have countered generics by
increasing the breadth and complexity of thepatent fence around their crown jewels traditional protection covered NCE, method of
making, method of using (treating), and apharmaceutical formulation
Today, patents are typically also filed on: New indications Polymorphs Mechanisms of action Combination products/therapies Dosing regimens Dissolution/bio profiles NEW FORMULATIONS 0 very important Methods of stabilizing
8/7/2019 Biologics Patent Protection
7/26
8/7/2019 Biologics Patent Protection
8/26
8/7/2019 Biologics Patent Protection
9/26
9
Patentability Issues To obtain an improvement patent, applicant
must show claimed subject matter is novel,nonobvious, etc. over earlier patent to drug or biologic per se Generally not difficult to show novelty
But must be careful regarding inherent anticipation
Focus is generally on obviousness
KSR Intl Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. ___(2007) Supreme Court clarified obviousness Now easier for USPTO to establish prima facie case
of obviousness and shift burden to applicant to proveotherwise
8/7/2019 Biologics Patent Protection
10/26
10
Patentability Issues
KSR v. Teleflex Improvement must be more than
predictable use of prior art elements Not limited to references dealing with
precise problem addressed Any need or problem known in the field and
addressed by patent can provide reason for combining elements
Obvious to try could be enough insome instances
8/7/2019 Biologics Patent Protection
11/26
11
Patentability Issues In response to KSR case, USPTO
established training guidelines for examiners
Identified acceptable rationales tosupport prima facie case of obviousness:
A. Combining prior art elementsaccording to known methods to yieldpredictable results
8/7/2019 Biologics Patent Protection
12/26
12
Patentability Issues USPTO Rationales for Obviousness
B. Simple substitution of one known, equivalentelement for another to obtain predictable results E.g. one known excipient for another?
C. Use of known technique to improve similar products in the same way
Application of technique to similar product must bewithin ordinary skill in art
D. Applying a known technique to a known productready for improvement to yield predictable results
E.g. lyophilization?
E. Obvious to try choosing from a finite number of predictable solutions
8/7/2019 Biologics Patent Protection
13/26
13
Patentability Issues
Rebutting Obviousness Rejections Submit technical evidence showing that subject
matter claimed in later (improvement) patent could nothave been predicted to work
Show that claimed subject matter (e.g. newformulation) has unexpected advantages (e.g.,increased efficacy, stability, etc.)
Clinical studies provide good opportunities for patenting improvements, since in vivo effect aredifficult to predict
8/7/2019 Biologics Patent Protection
14/26
14
The Role of Formulations in BiologicsPatent Protection
Although no formal legal/regulatory
framework for approving genericbiologics exists, biologic innovators arealready applying patent life cyclemanagement strategies to extend patentprotection on blockbuster biologics
As in the pharma industry, formulation
patents are essential components of apatent life cycle management strategyfor biologics
8/7/2019 Biologics Patent Protection
15/26
15
Case Study I Erythropoietin (Amgen) U.S. Pat. No. 4,703,008
Effective filing date 12/13/83 (but 17-year termfrom grant since pre-GATT) Claim 2: A purified and isolated DNA sequence
consisting essentially of a DNA sequenceencoding human erythropoietin .
U.S. Pat. No. 5,547,933 Effective filing date = 12/13/83 (17 year term)
Claim 3. A non-naturally occurring erythropoietinglycoprotein product . . . having glycosylationwhich differs from that of human urinary erythropoietin.
8/7/2019 Biologics Patent Protection
16/26
16
U.S. Pat. No. 5,597,562 Effective filing date = 6/3/91 (17-year
term) Claim 1: An oral dosage form
comprising the components:(a) GCSF or erythropoietin ;(b) Surfactant(s)(c) Fatty acid(s); and
(d) Enteric material,wherein said components (a), (b) and (c) are
mixed in liquid phase and lyophilized prior tocombination with component (d).
Case Study I: Erythropoietin (Amgen)
8/7/2019 Biologics Patent Protection
17/26
17
Case Study I: Erythropoietin (Amgen)
U.S. Pat. No. 5,856,298 Effective filing date = 10/13/89 (17-year
term) Claim 1: An isolated biologically active
erythropoietin isoform having a singleisoelectric point and having a specificnumber of sialic acids per molecule, saidnumber selected from the group
consisting of 1-14 . . . .
8/7/2019 Biologics Patent Protection
18/26
18
Case Study I: Erythropoietin (Amgen)
U.S. Pat. No. 7,217,689 Effective filing date = 10/13/89 (17 year
term) Claim 1: An analog of human
erythropoietin . . . comprising an aminoacid sequence which differs from theamino acid sequence of humanerythropoietin . . . by having one or more
additional glycosylation site(s) ascompared to human erythropoietin.
8/7/2019 Biologics Patent Protection
19/26
19
Case Study I: Erythropoietin (Amgen)
U.S. Pat. No. 5,661,125 Effective filing date = 08/06/92 (almost 9
years after first patent) (17-year term) Claim 1: A stable pharmaceutical
composition comprising a solution of atherapeutically effective amount of erythropoietin and a preservative selectedfrom the group consisting of benzyl
alcohol, a paraben and phenol or amixture thereof.
8/7/2019 Biologics Patent Protection
20/26
20
Case Study I: Erythropoietin (Amgen) U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2006/0264377
Effective filing date = 4/7/00 If issues will expire 4/7/2020 Claim 1: A pharmaceutical composition
comprising:(a) A substantially homogenous preparation of mono-
PEGylated NESP , said mono-PEGylated NESPconsisting of a polyethylene glycol moietyconnected to a NESP moiety solely at the N-terminus thereof;
(b) Fewer than 5% non-pegylated NESP molecules;and
(c) A pharmaceutically acceptable diluent, adjuvantor carrier.
(NESP is a hyperglycosylated EPO analog havingfive changes in the amino acid sequence of rHuEPO which provide for two additionalcarbohydrate chains)
8/7/2019 Biologics Patent Protection
21/26
21
Case Study II: Growth Hormone (Novo)
U.S. Pat. No. 5,633,352
Effective filing date = 12/9/83 (17-year term) Claim 1: Biosynthetic ripe human growthhormone from pituitary derived human growthhormone.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,547,696 Effective filing date = 10/13/94 (17-year term) Claim 1: A pharmaceutical formulation comprising
a growth hormone in the amount of about 0.1mg/ml to about 40 mg/ml and valine at aconcentration up to about 100 mM.
8/7/2019 Biologics Patent Protection
22/26
22
Case Study II: Growth Hormone (Novo)
U.S. Pat. No. 5,552,385 Effective filing date = 6/5/95 Claim 1: A pharmaceutical formulation
comprising a growth hormone and Lys-Gly-Asp-Ser (SEQ ID No: 1).
U.S. Pat. No. 6,117,984 Effective filing date = 7/12/91
Claim 1: Divalent cation crystals of humangrowth hormone (hGH) or derivativesthereof.
8/7/2019 Biologics Patent Protection
23/26
23
Case Study II: Growth Hormone (Novo)
U.S. Pat. No. 5,849,704
Effective filing date = 12/16/92 Claim 1: A pharmaceutical composition in theform of a lyophilized powder comprising a growthhormone or a derivative thereof and histidine or histidine derivative . . . .
U.S. Pat. No. 6,022,858 Effective filing date = 1/28/92 Claim 1: A pharmaceutical formulation comprising
a human growth hormone pretreated with zinc salt for at least one hour before addition of other components to the formulation and optionallycontaining lysine or calcium ion.
8/7/2019 Biologics Patent Protection
24/26
8/7/2019 Biologics Patent Protection
25/26
25
Conclusions
Patent life-cycle management is the strategicuse of patents to maintain product exclusivityand revenue stream over the life of acommercially valuable drug or biologic
Successful companies will have fully integratedpatent life-cycle and product life cycle programs
Companies should consider strategic patentingboth before and after marketing approval
Formulation patents are particularly effective atextending exclusivity
Effective patent life-cycle management requirescareful attention to the timing of filings and thecontent of the application
8/7/2019 Biologics Patent Protection
26/26
26
The Role of Formulations in Biologics Patent Protection
Thank You
Timothy J. Shea, Jr.Elizabeth Haanes
Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox, P.L.L.C.
(202) 772-8679