It is not news that GLP-1 agonists sold by Novo Nordisk (semaglutide) and Eli Lilly (tirzepatide) are surging in demand and could become one of the influential drugs ever. That demand contributed to a shortage of the active ingredients in Lilly’s and Novo Nordisk’s drugs. During that time, drug compounders stepped into meet the supply the brands couldn’t provide. The FDA recently announced those drug shortages were over. The compounders sued the FDA, the brands intervened, and the cases are proceeding on an expedited basis. What’s the status of the cases? And, even if the drugs are returned to the shortage list, can Novo Nordisk and Lilly resort to their patents to maintain their GLP-1 monopolies?
Read MoreThe debate around whether patents are unnecessarily propping up drug prices has been simmering for years. A recent policy memo from the Hudson Institute has thoughtfully raised concerns about the data underlying this debate, and the memo made its way up to the U.S. Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Intellectual Property. While the memo may have successfully poked holes in some of the data, it draws questionable conclusions regarding what those holes might mean. Unpacking this debate is therefore necessary to guide the correct policy on the intersection of patents and drug prices. Read the full article at IPWatchdog.
Read MoreModerna is currently embroiled in an intellectual-property dispute that may be material to its long-term profits, regardless of which of the products in its pipeline eventually succeed. At least one company, Arbutus Biopharma, has already claimed that Moderna’s tech uses its mRNA delivery technology. Two pending patent disputes may decide whether Arbutus’ patents are a roadblock to Moderna’s revenue.
Read MoreIn the course of eviscerating IPRs through Oil States, pharma could theoretically open the door to jury trials for its patents. That may not be a good thing for branded pharma.
Read More