1

Presented by:

Swapnil N. DharmshaleM.Pharm-1st (Q.A).

D.S.T.S Mandal’s College of Pharmacy, Solapur.2

Date:-12-11-2013

Introduction

New drug

Overview of global Pharma. Industry

Global generic market

Indian relevance to global generic industry

FDA requirements for generic drugs

Hatch-Waxman Act

Orange book

USFDA approval process

Conclusion

Content

3

Introduction

4

New drug : Generic name /Brand name

A generic drug is exactly the same molecule as branded drug.

Generic drug cost effective Alternative to branded drug.

Drug Approval:

Investigational New Drug (IND)

New Drug Application (NDA): New chemical entities

Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA): Generic Drug

Overview of the world Pharmaceutical Industry

5

The data as per the year 2007 - the generic industry is growing at a rate

faster than the overall pharmaceutical industry

Reasons –

Economic changes

Changing consumer demands for low prices high quality drugs

Changing societal values

Significant health-care demands

Changing composition of workforces

The major contribution being the increase in competition amongst

the generic and the brand name industry which has come due to the

change in the USFDA approval process from a slow time

consuming to a comparatively faster process

GLOBAL GENERIC MARKETS

6

The global pharmaceuticals industry generated total revenues of $615.1 billion

in 2008.

The global market for generic drugs was worth $84 billion in 2009.

In 2014, the market is expected to amount to $129.3 billion, for a compound

annual growth rate (CAGR) of 9% in the 5-year period.

Sales of U.S. generic drugs currently dominate the market, at $34 billion in

2009 and projected to increase at a CAGR of 9.7% to $54 billion in 2014.

Japan‟s generic drugs market is expected to have the highest rate of growth

among major markets at 12.2%, increasing from $5.4 billion in 2009 to $9.6

billion in 2014.

Major Pharma company share will decrease due number of patent expiries and

intensifying competition from generics.

GLOBAL GENERIC MARKETS

7

Parameters Global pharmaceutical

industry

Generic share

Size ($bn) 643 55

Growth rate 7% 11%

Key players US ($245 bn)

Japan ($60 bn)

Germany ($27 bn)

France ($24 bn)

UK ($15 bn)

US ($28 bn)

Japan ($5 bn)

Germany ($6 bn)

UK ($3.4 bn)

France ($2 bn)

Expected growth 5-7% 13-15%

Projected size

(by 2010)

$812 bn at 6% growth

rate

$93 bn at 14%

growth rate

8

WHY GENERICS: A $90B GLOBAL OPPORTUNITY

US, Canada: $50bn

Western Europe

$17bn

Latin America: $2bn

Rest of World: $4bn

Eastern Europe & Russia: $10bn

China: $3bn

Japan: $4bn

Total World Pharmaceutical Sales: $600bn

9

Drugs Brand Price

$/30

Generic

price $/30

Lisinopril (Zestril® ) 20 mg 46.69 20.69

Citalopram (Celexa® ) 20 mg 100.99 52.99

Ciprofloxacin (Cipro®) 500 mg 215.99 88.59

Merformin (Glucophage®)

1000mg

71.59 30.69

Fluconazloe (Diflucan®) 200mg 609.99 372.99

Fluoxetine(Prozac®) 20mg 139.99 32.29

BRAND V/S GENERIC PRICES

10

Drug Therapeutic

Area

Company Expiry

Year

Global Sales

(2008 billion $)

Lipitor (Atrovastin Calcium) CVS Pfizer 2011 13.5

Plavix ( clopidogrel bisulfate) CVS Sanofi Aventis BMS 2011 9.4

Advair ( Fluticasone Propionate

& Salmetraol)

Respiratory GSK 2010 7.8

Diovan (Valsartan) CVS Novarties 2012 5.8

Zyprexa (Olanzapine) CNS Ell lily 2011 4.7

Singular (Montelukast) Respiratory Merck 2012 4.6

Seroquel(Quetiapine fumarate) CNS Astrazeneca 2011 4.6

Lovenox (Enoxaporin sodium) CVS Sanofi Aventis 2012 4.0

Actos (Pioglitazone) Antidiabetic Takeda 2011 3.9

Prevacid ( Lansoprazole) GIT Takeda 2010 3.7

Cozaar ( Losartan Potassium) CVS Merck 2010 3.6

Aricept (Donepezil) CNS Pfizer 2010 3.6

Lexapro (Escitalopram) CNS Forest Lab 2011 3.4

Eloxatin (Oxalipaltin) Oncology Sanofi Aventis 2013 3.0

TOP 14 DRUG GOING OFF PATENT IN 4 YEARS

11

Major Indian Players:

Ranbaxy : Amongst Top 10 global players Dr ReddysCiplaWochardtSun PharmaceuticalsGlenmarkLupinNicholas PiramalTorrentMatrix Laboratories

Indian Relevance to global generics industry

INDIAN GENERICS APPROVED BY FDA

12

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Tentative

Final

GENERIC DRUG

13

Brand Name Drug - The brand name drug is the name under which a new

innovator medication is developed and marketed. When a pharmaceutical

company develops a new medication, they obtain patent for it.

Generic Drug – Generic drugs are considered identical, or bioequivalent to

the brand-name originals.

They contain the same active substances and have the same quality, efficacy

and safety.

Definition:

•GENERIC DRUG IS A PHARMACEUTICAL PREPARATION THAT IS

ESSENTIALLY SIMILAR TO AN ORIGINAL PRODUCT, INVOLVING AN

ACTIVE INGREDIENT THAT IS NO LONGER PROTECTED BY A PATENT*

AND IS SOLD UNDER A COMMON NAME WITH LITTLE OR NO

PROMOTION.

* THOUGH THE FORMULATION MAY OR MAY NOT BE PATENTED

FDA REQUIREMENTS FOR GENERIC DRUG

Phases

Of

validation

14

Contain the same active ingredients (Pharmaceutical equivalent)

Be identical in strength, dosage form, and route of administration

Have the same indications

Be bioequivalent

Meet the same batch requirements for identity, strength, purity, and quality

Be manufactured under the same strict standards of FDA's good manufacturing practice regulations required for reference Listed drug (RLD)-brand name Product listed in “Orange book” (www.fda.gov/cder/ob).

DEFINITIONS

15

Pharmaceutical EquivalenceSame active drug ingredient ,same strength, same dosage form androute of administration, comparable labeling, meets compendial orapplicable standard of strength.

BioavailabilityThe rate and extent to which the active moiety is absorbed from a drugProduct and become available at site of action.

BioequivalenceTwo pharmaceutical equivalent drug product are bioequivalent if after drugadministration, the bioavailabilities (rate and extent of drug availability)provide similar effect with respect to efficacy and safety.

Therapeutic EquivalenceTherapeutic equivalence means that a chemical equivalent of adrug product (i.e., containing the same amount of the same drug in the samedosage form) when administered to the same individuals in the same dosageregimen will provide essentially the sameefficacy and toxicity.

ACT GOVERNING DRUG APPROVAL

16

The act governing generic drug approval process of the

USFDA

“Hatch-Waxman Act of 1984”

or “Drug Price Control and Patent Term Restoration Act of

1984”.

17

Market was ruled by brand name drug manufacturers – innovators

Lack of competition

Innovator enjoyed his elite monopoly period within which no other brand

of the same drug can enter into the market

Highest prices of the drugs

To stop these practices and to make user friendly drug market, the US

congress passed the Hatch Waxman Act in 1984

Earlier Scenario (before “Hatch-Waxman Act of 1984” )

18

The Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984,

signed into Law on September 24, 1984

Hatch-Waxman was designed to speed entry of generic drugs to compete

with patented pharmaceuticals

The results of the act seek to balance the interests of the branded

manufacturers with those of generics

Birth of Generics: The Hatch-Waxman Act

Types of

Process

validation

19

Offset the drug approval delay:

Earlier innovators used to encounter delay in approval of their NDA which

affected their brand entry in the market and hence financial loses!!!!!

Bring healthy competition and to avoid price rise:

Earlier no scope for generics to enter the market until innovator patent

term expired as no provisions to challenge the validity of innovator patent.

This product monopoly kept competion away and drug prices high as per

innovator will!!!!!!

Make life easier for the generic:

Generic manufacturers used to face a lot of difficulties in doing all the pre-

clinical and clinical studies as done by brand manufacturer to get generic

approved!!!!!

Objectives of the act

20

Regulatory delays in brand approval were deciphered

The market exclusivity and the „effective patent life‟ was

extended from 8.5years (1980) to 13 years (late 1980s) and

now it‟s nearly 16-17years

Benefits received by the brand name manufacturers

21

The generic could challenge the validity of the patent issued to the

innovator

The act provided with the stipulation to file an ANDA to leave out the

expensive pre-clinical and clinical trials as done by the innovator

Provided with the provision of relying on the safety and efficacy data of the

innovator drug and to perform a much cheaper „bioequivalence‟ to

establish equivalence with the innovator

Once approved the generic gets an exclusivity period of six months to

market the product along with the innovator during which no other generic

can be given approval

Benefits received by the generic manufacturers

The Orange Book

22

The FDA publishes a list of all drugs approved for marketing in the US

under the title “Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence

Evaluations” - “Orange Book”

Lists the NDA‟s and ANDA‟s along with the expiry dates of patents and

generic exclusivities

Ready reference of brand drug products for the generic companies who

usually use this information to identify the reference for developing their

generic version

Also contains therapeutic equivalence codes (two letter coding system e.g.

AB)

A- prefixing product is considered to be substitutable

B- prefixing is a safe and effective product for use but is regarded in-

equivalent and non-substitutable with the brand name drug product

23

Para I – there is no patent for the drug listed in the Orange

Book

Para II – patent is listed but has expired

Para III – patent is listed, is valid but the generic wants

approval to market the drug once the pertinent patent expires

Para IV – the generic manufacturer either challenges the

validity of the patent asserting it to be invalid or fake, or it

affirms the non-infringement of the brand name patent claims.

Most critical and gives rise to anti- competitive practices

ANDA certifications

24

The generic must have –

Same active ingredient,

Same route of administration,

Same dosage form,

Same strength,

Same condition of use

USFDA approval requirements:

Brand name (NDA) vs Generic (ANDA)

NDA vs ANDA Review Process

25

26

The ANDA applicant must provide appropriate notice of a paragraph IV

certification to each owner of the patent that is the subject of the

certification and to the holder of the approved NDA to which the ANDA

refers

The ANDA applicant may certify with a legal ground that a listed patent is

invalid or will not be infringed by the manufacture, use, or sale of the

generic product.

This gives an immediate right to innovator to file a patent infringement

lawsuit against the generic manufacturer

The innovator can file this lawsuit within 45 days of the ANDA filing

notice from the generic

This sets in a process which detains the FDA from giving approval to the

generic for a period of 30 months

FDA is free to grant approval after 30 months which depends upon the

result of the pending litigation

USFDA Approval Process (Para IV certification)

27

An incentive to the „first approved generic‟ after filing a Para

IV certification

This incentive gives the first generic an exclusivity period of

180 days to market and earn profits

During this period, the brand name drug is the only

competition and FDA can not approve any other generic until

this exclusivity period perishes

The 180 day cycle begins on the day the generic comes into

the market for the first time or the day of courts decision in

favor of the generic

The six month generic exclusivity

28

Warehousing patents and frivolous lawsuits

Also referred to as “Evergreening” of patents

Innovator may patent multiple attributes of a product like manufacturing

process or metabolite and keeps on adding patents in the Orange

Book, forcing the generic to wait for the patent to expire or file para IV

which brings along risk of litigation and associated cost and delays!!!

Loopholes in Hatch-Waxman Act

CASE STUDY

29

Case Study – Buspar Case : BMS v Mylan Pharmaceuticals

BMS had US Patent 4,182,763 (Expiry – July 21, 2000)

Claims cover buspirone as an anxiolytic agent

Mylan filed para III against this patent and obtained tentative approval to

market the drug not before July 22, 2000

BMS obtained another patent just 12 hours before the expiry of first patent

covering the active metabolite of the buspirone having anxiolytic activity

and listed it in the OB

Mylan filed para IV against this newly listed patent

BMS responded by filing infringement lawsuit immediately halting the

final market approval

This gives the brand name manufacturer at least an additional two and a

half years of product monopoly

30

Commonly referred to as “Sweetheart deals”

Allows the first generic manufacturer and the innovator to enter into an

agreement and to have control when to introduce the generic

This would not trigger the 180days generic exclusivity period offered to the

first generic

The FDA is bound not to approve another generic until the 180 day generic

exclusivity period perishes

This allows the innovator and first generic to share financial awards

keeping other generic competitors in an indeterminate state

Maneuvering the six month Generic Exclusivity

CASE STUDY

31

1) Diltiazem hydrochloride (Cardizem CD by Hoechst-Marion Roussel,

Inc. (“HMRI”))

Used to treat angina and hypertension

Andrx Pharmaceuticals Inc. was first ANDA filer with para IV for Cardizem CD;

HMRI filed suit against Andrx

In September 1997, FDA tentatively approved Andrx‟s generic product

Andrx would have been expected to be able to enter the market upon the expiration

of 30 month stay in July 1998

However, Andrx and HMRI settled the litigation

In settling the litigation, both the parties agreed that, beginning upon the final FDA

approval of Andrx‟s generic product, HMRI would pay Andrx $10 million per

quarter not to enter the market with its generic product until the conclusion of the

patent litigation

CASE STUDY

32

2) Terazosin hydrochloride (Hytrin by Abbott)

Used for the treatment of high blood pressure and enlarged prostate

Litigation involves agreement between Abbott and Geneva Pharmaceuticals

Inc. and also between Abbott and Zenith Goldline Pharmaceuticals Inc.

Agreement between Abbott and Geneva was an “interim” settlement that

did not finally resolve the patent issues

Geneva agreed to accept $4.5 million per month from Abbott to refrain

from marketing generic product of Hytrin until another generic maker sold

a generic version in the USA or Geneva received a final, unappealable

judgement that its proposed generic tablet did not infringe Abbott‟s patents

Also, as part of the agreement, Geneva and Abbott allegedly agreed to

continue the patent infringement litigation on Geneva‟s generic tablet

33

Generic manufacturer must establish equivalence with the RLP

developed by the innovator

FDA has established two basic criteria for the generic to be

equivalent with the innovator –

• In vitro equivalence criteria

• In vivo bioequivalence

FDA Generic Approval Criteria: Establishing In Vitro Equivalence

and Bioequivalence with the Reference Listed Product (RLP)

34

Comparison of the dissolution profile of generic drug and brand name drug

by similarity factor of f2

f2 = 50 * log ( 1 + (1/n) summation (Rt –Tt) 2 ) 0.5 * 100

Comparison is done especially to assure similarity in product performance

Regulatory interest is knowing how similar the two curves are and to have

a measure which is more sensitive to large differences at any particular

time point

When the two profiles are identical, f2 = 100

FDA has set a public standard of f2 value between 50-100 to indicate

similarity between dissolution profiles

In vitro equivalence criteria

35

Single dose; two-way crossover fasted or fed state studies - This means all the

test subjects receive both the generic and the brand name product, done in a cross-

over manner and products are given once to each subject on different occasions and

the pharmacokinetic data are compared between the two treatments between each

subject

This study gives an idea of the inter-subject variability

Replicate design – This design gives the same product to each subject more than

once.

The overall number of subjects is reduced but the number of times each subject has

to come increases

Two most common parameters which are studied and compared are Cmax and the

AUC related to rate and extent of drug absorption in the blood respectively

These parameters are accessed using the 90% confidence intervals that must fit

between 80-125%

36

The dissolution measurements of the two products (test and reference)

should be made under the same test conditions

Dissolution time points should be same for both the products

f2 value of 50 or greater (50-100) ensures sameness or equivalence of the

two curves, and, thus, the performance of the two products

f2 value less than 50 does not necessarily mean lack of similarity

37

Generic manufacturer has to conduct bioequivalence study in place of pre-

clinical and clinical studies to establish equality with the innovator

Purpose of bioequivalence is to have a generic drug product which is

substitutable for a reference product „without any additional prescriber

intervention‟

There should not be any change in the efficacy and no additional incidents

of side effects

The usual study designs are single dose; two-way crossover fasted or fed

state studies and replicate designs

In vivo equivalence

38

FDA allows the generic manufacturers to not have to study every

single strength of a product and requires some in vitro tests for the

same

e.g. the testing on the low strength version of an already

bioequivalence established product. As lower strengths are

proportional to their matching higher strengths; FDA only requires

some in vitro testing

Other types of products which may be granted biowaiver include –

Parenteral solutions

Inhalational anaesthetics

topical solution

Oral solutions

Biowaivers

39

CONCLUSIONS

US congress passed the Hatch Waxman Act in 1984 for the benefit of consumers in an attempt to stop dominance and monopoly of theinnovator and to encourage the use of cheaper and equally effectivedrugs.ie. GENERICS

40

41