Biologics, patents and drug prices
The Hindu
FEBRUARY 08, 2018
Feroz Ali & Sudarsan Rajagopal
India’s rejection of secondary
patents has kept blockbuster medicines affordable for many
The
global sales of the world’s best-selling prescription drug, Humira, continue to
grow even after the expiry of the patent over its main ingredient, adalimumab,
a biologic used for the treatment of arthritis. By 2020, AbbVie Inc, makers of
Humira, expects its sales to touch $21 billion — a figure that will surpass
India’s pharmaceutical exports for that
year. But success has its price. In 2015, faced with the imminent expiry of the
patent for Humira’s main ingredient, AbbVie reassured investors that the “Broad
U.S. Humira Patent Estate” — a list of 75 secondary patents in the U.S. for new
indications, new methods of treatment, new formulations, and the like — would
take care of the problem.
But what was the problem?
Patents offer their owners market exclusivity for a limited period of time. For
medicines, this exclusivity should last as long as the primary patent — which
relates to the active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) of the medicine — is in effect,
typically 20 years. The end of patent exclusivity is referred to as a patent
cliff, because drug prices fall steeply afterwards — by as much as 80% — owing
to generic competition.
But the threat of
this precipitous fall in profits drives pharmaceutical companies to find new
ways to postpone their exclusivity by filing secondary patents for derivatives
and variants of the API, such as a physical variant of the API, a new
formulation, a dosage regimen, or a new method of administering the medicine.
The secondary patents prop up before the expiry of a primary patent thereby
stretching the exclusivity beyond 20 years, a practice that is called
“evergreening”. This strategy is most lucrative when employed in the context of
so-called blockbuster medicines, which reap annual revenues exceeding $1
billion.
Secondary patents
The Humira patent
estate now comprises secondary patents. While it is hard to comprehend how real
estate can grow, the genius of patent law allows the intellectual property
estate to expand by filing more secondary patents. Over the years, AbbVie has
increased the price of Humira in the U.S. by 100%, while steadily filing a
large number of secondary patents. While the complexity of biologics – drugs
made from complex molecules manufactured using living cells — allows for filing
more patents, the patent laws too play a role. The U.S. recognises and
encourages secondary patents. India, however, does not, which means that while
Humira costs $1,300 (₹85,000)
in the U.S., the same treatment costs only $200 (₹13,500) in India, thanks to the rejection of
secondary patents on Humira by the Indian Patent Office (IPO) and the
consequent introduction of cheaper versions.
The rejection of a
secondary patent for Novartis’ Glivec, a crucial leukaemia cure, was famously
upheld by the Supreme Court of India in 2013, while the same was granted in the
U.S. Consequently, the cost of a monthly dose of the medicine in the U.S. was ₹1.6 lakh, while the
cost of the generic was ₹11,100
in India. Likewise, Spiriva, a medicine for asthma, enjoys patent protection
until 2021 in the U.S., largely due to secondary patents. All of these
secondary patents were rejected in India. As a result, while the monthly cost
of the medicine in the U.S. is over ₹19,100, it costs a mere ₹250 in India.
Good patent law
In our study of more
than 1,700 rejections for pharmaceutical patents at the IPO spanning the last
decade, we identified a subset of applications that sought protection in the
form of secondary patents for blockbuster medicines. Our study sheds new light
on how Indian patent law helps thwart evergreening practices by pharmaceutical
companies. Secondary patents for several blockbuster medicines have been
rejected by the IPO dramatically expanding access to medicines for important
health problems such as cancer, AIDS, asthma and cardiovascular diseases.
None of this would
have been possible without some remarkable innovations in Indian patent law. To
be deemed patentable, applications for secondary patents have to clear
significant hurdles. As per Section 2(1)(ja) of the Patents Act, the product in
question must feature a technical advance over what came before that’s not
obvious to a skilled person. Because secondary patents for pharmaceuticals are
often sought for trivial variants, they typically fail to qualify as an
invention. Further, when a medicine is merely a variant of a known substance,
Section 3(d) necessitates a demonstration of improvement in its therapeutic
efficacy. The provision also bars patents for new uses and new properties of
known substances. This additional requirement is unique to Indian law, and
along with Section 2(1)(ja), ensures that bad patents stay out of the system.
We found that
secondary patents were rejected largely due to the stringent thresholds imposed
by Sections 2(1)(ja) and 3(d). Section 3(d) is not our only defence against
secondary patents. It is complemented by other exceptions to patentability:
Section 3(e) ensures that patents for combinations of known substances are
allowed only if there is synergistic effect, while Section 3(i) ensures that no
exclusivity can be claimed over methods of treatment. Together, Sections 3(d),
3(e) and 3(i) have been instrumental in rejecting close to 1,000 secondary
patents for pharmaceuticals we studied.
These provisions also
extend to biologics, the new big players in the therapeutics marketplace. More
lucrative than small molecule medicines, biologics are no stranger to the lure
of secondary patenting for extending patent terms. For instance, a quarter of
the secondary patents for Humira, a biologic, are directed towards new uses and
methods of treatment. Thanks to the provisions in the patent law, Humira enjoys
no patent protection in India, since AbbVie restricted their Indian filings to
only cover their secondary patents.
Blockbuster medicines
are crucial to the success of public health. But they have been gamed, and
rendered inaccessible to the people and governments who need them. In order for
these medicines to be accessible, there can be no surer way than to enact
strong standards that put bad patents where they belong.
Reference-http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/biologics-patents-and-drug-prices/article22682251.ece
Comments
Post a Comment