Tag: Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act

1
Fall Brings a Flurry of Biosimilar Approvals: FDA Approves Biosimilars of Enbrel® and Humira®
2
The Name Game: AbbVie’s Citizen Petition Regarding Biosimilar Labeling
3
BPCIA: A “Choose Your Own Adventure” Statute?
4
Zarxio®, First BPCIA Approved Biosimilar, Added to Purple Book
5
Denied Again: FDA Denies Amgen’s Citizen Petition Requesting Certification of Compliance with BPCIA Patent Dance
6
ODAC Committee Votes to License Sandoz’s Zarxio®
7
Federal Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Sandoz’s BPCIA-Related Declaratory Judgment Action Regarding Enbrel® Patents, but Declines to Address BPCIA Interpretation
8
Declaratory Judgment Action Premature: Decision Suggests “Patent Dance” Mandatory for Biosimilar Applicants
9
Next Steps in the Dance: Amgen Files Citizen Petition at FDA Requesting Mandatory Compliance with BPCIA Patent Procedures
10
Left without a Partner: Amgen Sues Sandoz for Refusing to Dance in Accordance with BPCIA Patent Procedures

Fall Brings a Flurry of Biosimilar Approvals: FDA Approves Biosimilars of Enbrel® and Humira®

The United States biosimilars market is beginning to grow, with two recent approvals for biosimilars: Erelzi® and Amjevita®.

On August 30, 2016, the Food & Drug Administration (“FDA”) approved Sandoz’s application for a biosimilar of Enbrel®.  The product is called Erelzi and is the first biosimilar of etanercept to be approved by the FDA.  Like Enbrel, Erelzi is administered by injection and is approved to treat moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis and moderate to severe plaque psoriasis, among other conditions.  Erelzi is approved as a biosimilar, not interchangeable, product. It is identified as etanercept-szzs.

Read More

The Name Game: AbbVie’s Citizen Petition Regarding Biosimilar Labeling

On June 2, 2015, AbbVie submitted a citizen petition to the FDA arguing against its interim labeling requirements for biosimilar products under the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (“BPCIA”).  As of now, the FDA has adopted the same labeling approach as used for generic pharmaceutical drugs.  However, AbbVie argues in its petition that “[b]iosimilars are not generic drugs and should not be labeled like generic drugs.”

To read the full alert, click here.

BPCIA: A “Choose Your Own Adventure” Statute?

On June 3, 2015, the Federal Circuit heard oral argument on Amgen Inc.’s (“Amgen”) appeal of the Northern District of California’s decision holding that the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act’s (“BPCIA’s”) “patent dance” provisions are optional, and that the 180-day notice provision does not require licensure in Amgen, Inc., et al. v. Sandoz, Inc., et al., Case No. 14-cv-04741-RS (N.D. Cal. March 19, 2015).

To read the full alert, click here.

Zarxio®, First BPCIA Approved Biosimilar, Added to Purple Book

In September 2014, the FDA published the first edition of the Purple Book: Lists of Licensed Biological Products with Reference Product Exclusivity and Biosimilarity or Interchangeability Evaluations (“Purple Book”), the biological equivalent of the pharmaceutical Orange Book. See FDA Releases a Purple Book for Biosimilars. The Purple Book has now been updated to include Sandoz, Inc.’s (“Sandoz”), Zarxio® (filgrastim), the United State’s first biosimilar approved under the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (“BPCIA”). See FDA Approves First Biosimilar: Sandoz’s Zarxio®.

To read the full alert, click here.

Denied Again: FDA Denies Amgen’s Citizen Petition Requesting Certification of Compliance with BPCIA Patent Dance

As discussed previously in Next Steps in the Dance: Amgen Files Citizen Petition at FDA Requesting Mandatory Compliance with BPCIA Patent Procedures, Amgen Inc. (“Amgen”) filed a Citizen Petition with the FDA requesting that the FDA mandate compliance with the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act’s (“BPCIA’s”) information exchange provisions, often referred to as the “Patent Dance.” In particular, Amgen requested that the FDA require a biosimilar applicant to certify that it will timely comply with Section 351(l)(2)(A) of the BPCIA by providing the brand holder with a copy of the biosimilar application and information describing the process(es) used to manufacture the biosimilar product covered by the application.

To read the full alert, click here.

ODAC Committee Votes to License Sandoz’s Zarxio®

Sandoz Inc. filed the first biosimilar application under the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act on July 24, 2014 for a biosimilar version of Amgen Inc.’s Neupogen® (filgrastim). The FDA issued a Briefing Document for the Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee Meeting held January 7, 2015 concluding that Sandoz’s biosimilar, referred to as EP2006 in the FDA’s Briefing Document, is highly similar to and has no clinically meaningful differences from Neupogen®.

To read the full alert, click here.

Federal Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Sandoz’s BPCIA-Related Declaratory Judgment Action Regarding Enbrel® Patents, but Declines to Address BPCIA Interpretation

The biologics industry has been eagerly awaiting the Federal Circuit’s ruling on Sandoz Inc.’s (“Sandoz”) appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California’s dismissal of its declaratory judgment action due to lack of Article III jurisdiction. In particular, the industry has been waiting to see whether the Federal Circuit would uphold the district court’s ruling that Sandoz’s lawsuit was barred by the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (“BPCIA”). Unfortunately, the Federal Circuit declined to address the district court’s interpretation of the BPCIA, providing no further guidance on the topic. Instead, the Federal Circuit simply affirmed the district court’s ruling that there was no subject matter jurisdiction, relying on Hatch-Waxman generic drug cases as precedent.

To read the full alert, click here.

 

Declaratory Judgment Action Premature: Decision Suggests “Patent Dance” Mandatory for Biosimilar Applicants

Biosimilar applicants and branded biologics have been wondering how the procedures set forth in the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (“BPCIA”) will be implemented since its enactment in 2010. The lack of guidance on this subject has already sparked litigation, including the recent litigation between Amgen Inc. (“Amgen”) and Sandoz Inc. (“Sandoz”) discussed in our previous client alert, Left without a Partner: Amgen Sues Sandoz for Refusing to Dance in Accordance with BPCIA Patent Procedures. However, Amgen and Sandoz are not the only parties that have brought disputes involving the BPCIA to the courts for resolution.

To read the full alert, click here.

Next Steps in the Dance: Amgen Files Citizen Petition at FDA Requesting Mandatory Compliance with BPCIA Patent Procedures

Amgen, Inc. has brought the discussion of the procedure for biosimilar applications from the courts to the FDA by filing a Citizen Petition (Docket No. FDA 2014 P 1771) on October 29, 2014, requesting that the FDA mandate compliance with the framework for biosimilar applications laid out by the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act.

To read the full alert, click here.

Left without a Partner: Amgen Sues Sandoz for Refusing to Dance in Accordance with BPCIA Patent Procedures

There has been a lot of curiosity within the biologics industry regarding how the “patent dance” procedures of the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (“BPCIA”) would operate. This interest was piqued in July 2014 when Sandoz Inc.’s (“Sandoz”) biosimilar application for a biosimilar of Amgen Inc.’s (“Amgen”) Neupogen® was the first accepted by FDA under section 351(k) of the Public Health Service Act. Apparently, Sandoz has refused to engage in the “patent dance” in accordance with the BPCIA, leaving Amgen without a dance partner. Amgen did not take kindly to being stranded on the dance floor and has opted to sue Sandoz for its allegedly unlawful refusal to follow the BPCIA’s patent resolution procedures.

To read the full alert, please click here.

Copyright © 2018, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.