Even though the U.S. FTC recently claimed a court victory in its campaign to shut down the listing of device patents for drugs in the FDA’s Orange Book, 80% of the listings targeted in the commission’s first round of warning letters remain in place more than seven months later.
Just a few days after the U.S. Congressional Research Service issued a report suggesting ways Congress could resolve the unanswered questions about patent listings in the FDA’s Orange Book, the FTC sent a second round of warning letters to eight biopharma companies and their subsidiaries, citing the listing of device patents for combination products.
After more than a decade of industry pleading for guidance on Orange Book patent listings, the U.S. FDA is finally planning on answering that request this year. If the guidance that’s produced reflects the FTC’s position that device patents can’t be listed for combination products, it could overturn years of accepted practice and possibly hinder the development of new, more advanced drug administration technologies.
Weaving in a loose regulatory end from March 2020 when it deemed nearly 100 NDAs as BLAs, the U.S. FDA released a final rule codifying its current approach to the use of drug master files for those products and their potential biosimilar competition.
When life-saving inhalers sell in Europe at 1.5% to about 8% of their list price in the U.S., they’re bound to attract scrutiny, especially in a time when inequities in prescription drug prices are fueling more and more legislation to reduce U.S. prices.
The U.S. FTC’s policing of Orange Book patent listings begs the question of when, and whether, the FDA will deliver on its commitment to provide more clarity on the types of device patents that can be listed as covering a “drug product.”
Carrying through on a policy it adopted a few months ago to crack down on potentially anticompetitive FDA Orange Book listings, the U.S. FTC put 10 drug companies on notice that it’s challenging several of their “improperly or inaccurately listed” patents through the FDA’s regulatory dispute process.
Developers of combination products face an unusual dilemma in their interactions with the U.S. FDA, given that the data for the constituent products reside in multiple product centers. Some of the related clunkiness may soon be a thing of the past thanks to a new four-year proposal to overhaul the FDA’s information technology infrastructure, which among other things will emphasize a more seamless sharing of data across centers, precisely the kind of initiative that would facilitate reviews of combination products.
Australia’s Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) is reconsidering its approach to regulating devices that bear materials of animal, microbial or recombinant origin, a broad class of products that includes transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) devices.
Australia’s TGA has opened a consultation on drug-device combination products to help sponsors understand the regulatory pathway through which their products will likely pass since these combination products may not fit within existing definitions for drugs, biologicals or medical devices.
