API and IP Newsletter

 Contents


FDA approval in May 2022- Tirzepatide


We follow FDA approvals. Tirzepatide was approved in May 2022.  Tirzepatide, brand name Mounjaro, is a medication used for the treatment type 2 diabetes. Tirzepatide is given by injection under the skin.


This is once weekly GIP receptor and GLP-1 receptor agonist. It is a 39-amino-acid modified peptide based on the GIP sequence. Tirzepatide contains 2 non-coded amino acids (aminoisobutyric acid, Aib) in positions 2 and 13, a C-terminal amide, and Lys residue at position 20 that is attached to 1,20-eicosanedioic acid via a linker. The molecular weight is 4813.53 Da and the empirical formula is C225H348N48O68



Diagram

Description automatically generated


Synthesis is disclosed in example 1 of WO2020159949A1


It uses 2-cholrotrityl chloride resin.

Hemmo, Merck Life Science, MSN and Apicore are importing this resin in small quantities, maybe for development of Tirzepatide. Hemmo is also importing 9-fluorenylmethyl carbazate, which is another basic RM of tirzepatide. This RM is imported by Merck and other chemical suppliers, maybe unlike Hemmo, MSN and Apicore are buying 9-fluorenylmethyl carbazate from these chemical suppliers. 


Interestingly, there are publications for synthesis of tirzepatide employing continuous manufacturing process, one of them is here. So, companies who have technologies for continuous manufacturing, for example Cipla and DRL could try and develop continuous manufacturing process for tirzepatide. 



General information


Piramal Pharma Solutions New API Plant in Canada Goes Online; Initial Production Runs Successfully Completed

The new plant, built as part of a CAD $30 million capital investment in the Aurora site, features more than ten thousand square feet of new manufacturing space and includes two new reactor suites with additional filtration and drying capabilities. It will support ongoing customer demand for Piramal Pharma Solutions' expertise in APIs and enhances and expands the company's ability to produce clinical to commercial scale APIs including highly potent APIs requiring an Occupational Exposure Limit (OEL) of 1mcg/m3.

News here.


Novartis looks to grow global CDMO unit after pandemic pacts put its strengths on display

Before the company's high-profile COVID production pacts with Roche, CureVac and BioNTech, Novartis had been carving out a spot in the contract manufacturing scene for more than 20 years, the executive explained. Over that stretch, the drugmaker has honed its production expertise in areas such as enzymes, proteins and antibiotics and garnered a “very solid customer base,” 

News here.


Intellectual Property 


Boehringer Ingelheim International Co. Vs Macleods Pharmaceuticals. Decision by HP High Court


This is regarding generic launch of linagliptin by Macleods in India. Earlier, Boehringer Ingelheim (BI) had obtained separate court orders, granting permanent injunction and an ad-interim injunction restraining several domestic drug companies from manufacturing and selling generic versions of linagliptin. This case was also requesting High Court of Himachal Pradesh to restrain Macleods Pharmaceuticals, from infringing the patent rights of Boehringer Ingelheim's linagliptin patent. (IN 243301) 


  1. Boehringer Ingelheim (BI) argued that for the purpose of grant of interim relief, three primary ingredients are required, i.e. 

    1. prima facie case, 

    2. balance of convenience and

    3. irreparable loss, and all three are in favour of BI.


  1. In addition, BI argued that as Macleods Pharmaceuticals  has not been able to lay any credible challenge to the ‘subject patent’.


  1. The patent in issue IN243301 (IN `301) is a commercially successful patent. The medicinal product “Linagliptin Tablet and Lenagliptin + Metformin Hydrochloride Tablets” covered by the said patent were introduced and launched in the Indian market under the brand name “Trajenta/Trajenta Duo” on 27.05.2012 and 21.06.2014, respectively. 


  1. BI  stressed that no party, including Macleods  had filed any pre-grant opposition, post-grant opposition or a revocation petition against (IN 301)


  1. Macleods argued that BI had obtained two patents, i.e. Patent No. 227719 ( IN 719’) for the “Markush” formula being the ‘genus’ patent, which expired on 21st February, 2022 and subject patent IN 301, which is a ‘species’ patent and both patents were granted for the same invention as it is nowhere disclosed either in the plaint or in the application as to what was the inventive step capable of industrial application, which distinguished patent IN`301 from IN`719. The Court was apprised that the Macleods  had filed a revocation petition against IN `301 under Section 64 of the Patents Act, 1970 in the High Court of Delhi, in which, notices to BI have been issued.


  1. It was argued by Macleods that they posed a credible challenge to IN 301, therefore, no interim relief be granted. It was argued that Macleods has rightly challenged the ‘species’ after the ‘genius’ has expired and BI is conspicuously silent with regard to the difference between the ‘genius’ patent and the ‘species’ patent, therefore, BI is not entitled for any relief. 


  1. The Court said, if an infringer is not restrained from infringing the patent of patent holder, then the patent holder will suffer from irreparable loss and it cannot be said that the infringer stands on the same pedestal on which the patent holder is. Of course, the patent of the BI is vulnerable. It is open to challenge and now it has also been challenged by the Macleods by way of a revocation petition. But mere filing of revocation petition cannot be treated to be a “credible challenge” to the old and successful patent of BI.


  1. According to Macleods, IN`301 is nothing but Evergreening of IN`719. However, the Court said, it cannot make any observation as to whether IN`301 is Evergreening of IN`719 at this stage. It will be decided later at revocation proceedings.


  1. Therefore, the Court opined, at this stage it cannot be said that Macleods has rendered a credible challenge to the patent for the purpose of declining interim protection to BI. Hence, the Court restrained Macleods Pharmaceuticals, from infringing on the patent rights of Boehringer Ingelheim's linagliptin, marketed under the trade name Trulicity. 


Decision here











Popular posts from this blog

API and IP Newsletter- Recent ANDA approvals and Roxadustat decision by EPO: T 0072/23

API and IP Newsletter

API and IP Newsletter