| |
Newspaper: The Economic
Times
Section: Policy
Date: 13th May’08
Page no.: 17
Patent linkage to drug regulation will enhance R&D
efficiency
Krishna Sarma
The recent (April 25) announcement by the Drug Controller
General of India (DCGI) that his office has decided to provide
patent linkage to reassure the industry that patents are being
honoured in India, has stirred a hornet’s nest. While
the research-based industry has welcomed the move, the domestic
industry launched a spirited criticism.
So what is it about patent linkage, which has provoked such
extreme reactions? Would it be such a terrible idea to provide
transparency and predictability of the process for both the
pioneer and the generic company? Would providing linkage really
hinder access as the critics predict?
Now for some answers. Patent linkage is the practice of linking
market approval for generic medicines to the patent status
of the originator reference product. If a patent exists, marketing
approval is not granted to a generic until the patent has
expired or is otherwise found to be invalid. Further, such
linkage is available if the patent claims covers the product.
Hitherto the DCGI has been issuing marketing approvals authorising
products to be marketed in India without checking that such
a product may violate a rightfully granted patent. Prior to
2005 when India did not provide product patent protection
to drug products, there was little need. However, after 2005
the situation is different. Drug patents are being granted
and might I add, after an elaborate Patent Office examination
and prosecution process including provision for intervention
by a third party through a pre-grant opposition.
Under the current regulatory regime, the originator/innovator
company who is the patent holder (or has a patent issued subsequently)
is at distinct disadvantage as it may not necessarily be the
first one to obtain a marketing approval in India and even
if it is indeed the first one, second and subsequent applicants
can obtain marketing approvals based on proving bioequivalence.
This is because the DCGI approves a new drug which has been
in use in another country and the applicant is required to
do a small Phase III confirmatory study. The regulatory hurdles
for a company seeking to export a patent protected product
are still lower – a No Objection certificate from the
DCGI and a manufacturing license from the state drug regulator
would suffice. The low regulatory hurdle coupled with an indifferent
patent enforcement regime encourages generic encroachment.
Several countries require the applicant for product registration
to check a box declaring that its product does not infringe
third parties’ rights. Patent linkages have long been
established in the US and Canada. China adopted this cost-effective,
selfdeclaration approach when its pharmaceutical laws and
regulations were reformed. Singapore has established linkage
under the US-Singapore Free Trade Agreement. The EU does not
have patent linkage, however it provides effective and meaningful
regulatory data protection of up to 11 years.
The genesis of patent linkage was in the US. While the Hatch
Waxman Act, 1984 enabled early generics entry in the US market,
it also incorporated an important mechanism designed to guard
against infringement of patents relating to pioneer drugs.
A New Drug Application (NDA) was required to include patent
information like the product name, patent number, patent expiry
date and exclusivity information. The FDA relies on innovator
drug company’s assertion and such patent information
is published in the Orange Book which lists Approved Drugs
and provides Patent and Exclusivity Information. Most importantly,
the Orange Book provides generic drug companies an opportunity
to inform FDA that it does not believe a particular listed
patent does cover the product and further under Para IV, an
assertion that the patent is not infringed or is invalid.
As we see from the preceding paragraph, Patent Linkage can
not only promote effective and adequate patent protection
but also allows generic drug companies to review patent information
to determine when a patent expires and what the patent covers.
The system reduces wasteful and unnecessary patent infringement
litigation by (1) requiring generic drug companies to assess
whether their drug product is subject to a patent prior to
seeking drug approval; and (2) acting as a safeguard for patent
rights by preventing potential patent violations. An adequate
linkage system also increases the efficiency and productivity
of the research and development sector. Better and more efficient
investment decisions mean faster development for lifesaving
inventions and better healthcare.
Having taken a positive step of providing for product patent
protection for pharmaceuticals in 2005, it would be in good
spirit to provide measures to safeguard pharmaceutical patent
rights. The requirements under the Drug and Cosmetics Rules
1945, particularly Appendix I and II of Schedule Y have to
be amended to provide for notification by the originator and
spelling out the circumstances under which generic entry is
possible. The DCGI’s statement that the government would
be preparing guidelines to protect patented products by not
allowing marketing approvals to generic copies is a welcome
step forward.
The author is managing partner of Corporate Law Group, a
Delhi-based law firm. Views expressed are personal.
|