LOGIN
ID
PW
MemberShip
2026-04-16 03:22:43
All News
Policy
Company
Product
Opinion
InterView
검색
Dailypharm Live Search
Close
Company
Opdivo resumes indication expansion in NSCLC as first-line
by
Eo, Yun-Ho
Nov 03, 2020 05:58am
The pharmaceutical industry sources reported Ono Pharmaceutical and Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS) have recently submitted an application to expand indication on a programmed death-1 (PD-1) immune checkpoint inhibitor Opdivo (nivolumab) in combination with a cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) immune checkpoint inhibitor Yervoy (ipilimumab) to treat patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) as a first-line treatment. In last May, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved Opdivo plus Yervoy combination as a first-line therapy on NSCLC patients with programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression over 1 percent. Also the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) of the European Medicines Agency (EMA) granted an approval recommendation on the combination therapy as well. The Phase 3 CheckMate-9LA study confirmed the efficacy of the Opdivo plus Yervoy combination treating patients with NSCLC as a first-line treatment. CheckMate-9LA is an open-label, multi-center, randomized Phase 3 trial that evaluated Opdivo plus Yervoy combined with two cycles of chemotherapy, compared to chemotherapy alone, as a first-line treatment in patients with metastatic NSCLC regardless of PD-L1 expression and histology. In the study, study, the combination of Opdivo plus Yervoy plus two cycles of chemotherapy resulted in superior overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall response rate (ORR), and met primary and secondary endpoints. An interim analysis following up the patients at least for 8.1 months found that the Opdivo plus Yervoy combined with two cycles of chemotherapy reduced the risk of death by 31 percent, compared to chemotherapy alone. Moreover, a longer follow-up of at least 12.7 months was able to verify the median OS of the Opdivo plus Yervoy combined with two cycles of chemotherapy marking 15.6 months, which continued to improve OS than the chemotherapy alone at 10.9 months. In the same extended follow-up, the combination therapy demonstrated improved OS regardless of PD-L1 expression. And in patient group with PD-L1 expression less than 1 percent, the risk of death was reduced by 38 percent, when the risk was reduced by 36 percent in patient group with over 1 percent expression. Comparing the combination therapy against the chemotherapy alone, the one-year PFS rate was at 33 percent and 17 percent, respectively, whereas their ORR were at 38 percent and 25 percent, respectively. In South Korea, Opdivo in combination with Yervoy, indicated to treat patients with renal cell carcinoma, is in process of seeking the healthcare reimbursement listing. In last June, the Cancer Deliberation Committee has passed the combination therapy.
Policy
Daewoong's DWP16001 targets synergistic effect with Zemiglo
by
Lee, Tak-Sun
Nov 03, 2020 05:58am
Daewoong Daewoong's new SGLT-2 inhibitory diabetes drug candidate is aiming for synergy with another domestic drug. The drug, first designated for expedited review, has been approved for three phase III clinical trials. The MFDS approved a phase III clinical trial protocol for Daewoong Pharmaceutical's new diabetes drug candidate 'DWP16001 (Enavogliflozin)' on the 30th of last month. This clinical trial is a Phase III therapeutic confirmation clinical trial conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of DWP16001 in patients with type 2 diabetes who have insufficient blood sugar control with Metformin and Gemigliptin. The clinical trial hospital is Bucheon ST. Mary’s Hospital. It is already the third phase III approval. In September, it received approval for Phase III clinical trials for both monotherapy and combination therapy with Metformin. In addition, validation of the combination therapy with Metformin-Gemigliptin is in progress. Gemigliptin is the active ingredient for Zemiglo, a new DPP-4 inhibitory diabetes drug developed by LG Chem. Daewoong has been selling Zemiglo since 2016. It also recently agreed to extend the joint sales until 2030. As Daewoong started selling the single drug Zemiglo and the combination drug Zemimet, last year, it achieved sales of ₩100 billion for the first among Korean new drugs. It is very interesting that Daewoong's SGLT-2 drug combination therapy selected a new domestic drug among DPP-4 drugs. In the case of the SGLT-2 series drugs mentioned above, most of the combined DPP-4 drugs are imported new drugs. Januvia (sitagliptin) and Onglyza (Saxagliptin) for Forxiga, Januvia (sitagliptin) for Suglat, Trajenta (linagliptin) for Jardiance and Januvia (sitagliptin) for Steglatro was validated through combination therapy. In addition, if Daewoong sells Zemiglo for the next 10 years and a new drug SGLT-2 is released in the middle, the combination therapy is expected to produce synergies in terms of profitability. The medical community argues that even if the SGLT-2 drug is administered in combination therapy clinical trials with one DPP-4 drug, the benefit should be made even if it is used in combination with another DPP-4 drug. Daewoong's Enavogliflozin is expected to be used in combination with other DPP-4 drugs even if it is used in combination clinical trials with Gemigliptin. Enavogliflozin is a drug that was selected for the first rapid review by the MFDS. It has been operating an expedited screening system based on corporate application since September. For drugs designated for expedited review, the approval review period is shortened by about 30 days (120 days → 90 days), and advance consultation is possible, so the supplementation rate is also lower. The MFDS said that Daewoong was designated as an innovative pharmaceutical company and that Enavogliflozin was designated as a subject for rapid review because it was a Korean drug.
Policy
Merck green lit to test novel COVID-19 antiviral in Korea
by
Lee, Tak-Sun
Nov 03, 2020 05:58am
A novel COVID-19 antiviral candidate, currently in development by a U.S.-based pharmaceutical company Merck, is to conduct a clinical trial in South Korea. Previously, Bloomberg covered the novel candidate as a ‘potential game-changer in the COVID-19 therapeutic scene. On Oct. 29, the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety (MFDS) has approved of a Phase 2/3 trial on Merck’s novel COVID-19 treatment candidate 'MK-4482.' The trial would test efficacy, safety and pharmacokinetics of MK-4482 in 60 adult patients in South Korea confirmed positive with COVID-19. The multinational company is enrolling total 1,300 patients around the world to test the novel antiviral candidate. The primary outcome measures are the time-to-sustained recovery, adverse event and adverse event to halt the test. The secondary outcome measures are all-cause mortality, pulmonary score on a scale, the U.K. National Early Warning Score on a scale and the World Health Organization (WHO) 11-point outcome score on a scale. MK-4482 is an antiviral candidate developed to treat patients with influenza. First discovered by the researchers at Emory University in the U.S., the candidate medicine is under development with a partner company Ridgeback Biotherapeutics. The treatment in tablet form, taken orally unlike remdesivir, has been under the public’s spotlight with an anticipation to significantly improve administration convenience, when its efficacy is confirmed.
Policy
1 out of 4 claims for unltra priced Spinraza were approved
by
Lee, Hye-Kyung
Nov 03, 2020 05:58am
Only one out of four applications for pre-approval for salary medication 'Spinraza (Nusinersen)', a treatment for Spinal Muscular Atropy (SMA), was approved last month. The remaining one can be approved conditionally, and two have to be supplemented with data. A monitoring report must be submitted before administration of maintenance dose every 4 months after approval of benefits, and all 34 cases of administration monitoring were approved. The HIRA (President Kim Sun-min) unveiled cases of review by the Medical Review and Evaluation Committee in September. Spinraza is an ultra-high-priced new drug with upper limit price of ₩92.3 million per 5ml bottle, and medical institutions that want to take it must apply for prior approval. According to the details of the standards and methods for applying medical care benefits, in the case of Spinraza, a patient with 5q spinal muscular dystrophy, who was genetically diagnosed with a 5q SMN-1 gene defect or mutation, developed SMA-related clinical symptoms and signs at the age of 3 years or younger, and should not be using a permanent ventilator in order to receive benefits. Soliris (Eculizumab), which was the subject of pre-approval application prior to Spinraza, was approved in only one out of five applications for pre-approval. Last month, there were no reports of paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH), and only one out of five new applications for Soliris benefits for atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome (aHUS) were approved. Medical institutions which have received pre-approval of Spinraza and Soliris must administer it within 60 days from the date of notification of the review result, and reapply if they intend to administer it after 60 days. On the other hand, detailed deliberations deliberated by the Medical Review Evaluation Committee in September can be found on the HIRA’s website.
Company
Roche: Fast listing was all about improving patient access
by
Eo, Yun-Ho
Nov 02, 2020 06:13am
President Nic Horridge An anticancer treatment specializing pharmaceutical company, Roche has been viewed to stand relatively “aloof” from seeking the health insurance reimbursement. But now Roche seems to be picking up its speed. Their last two years have been different; the company successfully expanded the reimbursement on targeted therapy Alecensa in anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) lung cancer as a first-line therapy, immunotherapy Tecentriq in lung cancer as a second-line therapy after listing in urothelial carcinoma, and targeted therapy Perjeta in early stage of breast cancer. Also the multinational company is under review for expanding the reimbursement on Tecentriq as a first immunotherapy in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), and antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) Kadcyla in breast cancer as a maintenance therapy, as well as for receiving reimbursement on a new flu drug Xofluza. President Nic Horridge at Roche Korea is in the center of such dynamic change. Appointed as a president of Roche Korea in October 2018, Horridge once said “We prioritize in the patients’ access to treatment more than anything else.” Daily Pharm interviewed President Nic Horridge about his perspective on the changed Roche and the prospects. -Soon, it would be two years since you took the position. And Roche’s products are receiving the reimbursements fast, which is a positive change in the company. It is gratifying for the public to notice the accelerated speed in the reimbursement listing process. Many may think of drug approval, when talking of pharmaceutical accessibility. But the healthcare reimbursement is crucial to secure the practical access to the treatments. We are proud of Roche’s close engagement with the South Korean government. The fact that the company’s products are meeting the government’s level of pharmaceutical value to win the reimbursements fast means significant to the company. Regarding the topic, I would like to express my gratitude to our staffs at Roche. Personally, this is one of the proudest parts of my career in South Korea—improving the Korean patients’ access to new drug. Specifically, Kadcyla and Perjeta are attempting various tactics to achieve complete recovery. In the lung cancer treatment area, Tecentriq and Alecensa contributing to the patients’ treatment benefit is also an outstanding performance. -What was your impression on the National Health Insurance (NHI) benefit system, and what do you think is the changes it needs? To be honest, my first impression of the South Korean reimbursement scene was that ‘it is not that easy.’ But a government trying to take the most value out of pharmaceutical purchasing cost is common in every country, so it does not necessarily make the Korean government too special or difficult. The upside of Korea is that the general review and decision making process are thorough, which makes it clear for the pharmaceutical companies to see what should be done and proven to list the drugs in the market. The system seems to clarify which evidence should be provided to reflect the needs of the healthcare providers and patients and to prove the value of the drug. And it even suggests which role should a company play as the government’s partner. Regardless, the time taken for the reimbursement listing in South Korea is relatively longer than other countries with similar regulatory environment. -Roche has been fruitful in the breast cancer therapeutic area, and its presence in the market seems to be outstanding. But with new immunotherapy line-ups, the company seems to have expanded to other cancer areas. Is there any challenge in the sales and marketing? This is the part we have been deeply contemplating about. And this applies not only to anticancer treatment fields, but also in other fields as well. To tackle the issue, we need to first study the issue the consumers have and then try to provide fitting solution. To do so properly, we need to push up our work efficiency, and take an agile stance on resource utilization. -Avastin, with its patent term coming to expire soon, is actually having its second golden age. While it is considered as the best combination drug for both targeted therapy and immunotherapy, we assume the health authority’s pressure to bring down the pricing would get greater. For any drug, patent term expiration is inevitable. This is the reason why Roche cannot cease to pursue innovation and annually invest USD 12 billion, or 20 percent of the entire sales from the group, to develop new drugs. The healthcare providers and patients would continue to look for Avastin, and the company would also continue to provide support for the market in an environment we can adequately provide such support. As Avastin has been recently studied to create remarkable synergy effect in combination with an immunotherapy, we plan to provide support regardless of the types of the cancer. But the weight of the innovation would be on Tecentriq than on Avastin. -Many news reporters were surprised to find out Tecentriq winning the NHI reimbursement. The South Korean government proposed pharmaceutical companies to cover the initial administration cost, and Roche was the only company with an immunotherapy option to accept the deal. Was there any regret in the decision? We are exhilarated to expand the patients’ access to Tecentriq with the company’s decision. Even if we turn back the time, we would make the exact same decision. It was a positive experience considering how we shared constructive talks with the government. -Roche’s reputation as a market leader in the anticancer treatment scene has been lately challenged as other companies are leading the immunotherapy competition and other anticancer businesses. What is your plan to maintain that title? Roche has the richest pipeline among the healthcare industry. There are 20 candidate medicines in late development phase, scheduled to be released in about five years. In South Korea, the company would continuously expand Tecentriq’s reimbursement in treating lung cancer and liver cancer, and pursue reimbursement on Kadcyla in treating early stage of breast cancer. Meanwhile, a neurotrophic tropomyosin receptor kinase (NTRK) gene targeted therapy Rozlytrek was recently approved. With the drug targeting a specific biomarker regardless of the types of cancer, the company is determined to continuously improve patients’ access to treatment.
Policy
Hyundai is preparing for domestic approval of Mifegyne
by
Lee, Jeong-Hwan
Nov 02, 2020 06:13am
Hyundai Pharm, which maintains the No. 1 market share in the emergency (post) contraceptives market, is preparing for the domestic market approval of the artificial abortion drug Mifegyne. Mifegyne was ruled by the Constitutional Court for an abortion inconsistency in April last year, and the need to legalize domestic use and interest in domestic pharmaceutical companies also increased significantly. On the 1st, it was confirmed that Hyundai Pharm had inquired in advance with the MFDS about the requirements for submitting data on safety and efficacy in order to apply for Mifgene for artificial saving during pregnancy. So far, no pharmaceutical company has applied for approval or consulted in advance for spontaneous abortion-inducing drugs. Hyundai Pharm’s Mifegyne is the only drug that has inquired in advance on the data submission requirements. The MFDS believes that it is possible to apply for Mifegyne's product permission in the future based on the fact that the revision of the Criminal Law, the Maternal and Child Health Law, and the Pharmaceutical Affairs Law were announced. Under the current law, artificial abortion is possible only by surgery. After the constitutional abortion crime was determined to be inconsistent with the constitution, amendments to the related law are announced, and artificial abortion through medicines is expected to be allowed. Mifegyne is a prescription drug approved in 1998 by the French pharmaceutical company Exelgyn. Mifegyne (Mifepristone) induces abortion by blocking the progesterone receptor. Approved in France in 1998, the prescription drug was developed by Russel Uclaf SA, one of Sanofi's predecessors. Currently, All rights reserved outside the United States by Exelgyn. If Hyundai Pharm acquires the copyright of Mifegyne and succeeds in licensing, it becomes the first pharmaceutical company to market artificial abortion drugs in Korea. In addition, Hyundai Pharm is expected to enjoy the effect of further strengthening its obstetrics and gynecology pipeline. Hyundai Pharm currently holds the No. 1 market share in the domestic emergency contraceptives market with Ellaone and Norebwon. A company official briefly replied that it is difficult to respond to the related details as there is currently no specific knowledge of the plan to introduce Mifegyne in Korea.
Company
19 Korean companies partially win Forxiga patent dispute
by
Kim, Jin-Gu
Nov 02, 2020 06:13am
Product image of Forxiga A South Korean court ruled in favor of the generic companies in an appeal case for a patent dispute on an antidiabetic sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitor Forxiga (dapagliflozin). The original company AstraZeneca lost another patent litigation in a higher court after losing from the Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board’s case. On Oct. 29, the Patent Court has rejected AstraZeneca’s appeal filed in last May to undo the preceding Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board’s decision ruled for 19 pharmaceutical companies with the generics. Regardless, the generic companies again won the five-month-long appeal case. The following companies participated in the case; Kukje Pharma, Intro Biopharma, Han Wha Pharma, Daewon Pharmaceutical, KyungDong Pharmaceutical, Dong-A ST, Samjin Pharm, JW Pharmaceutical, Boryung Pharmaceutical, Jeil Pharmaceutical, Yungjin Pharm, Chong Kun Dang, Ildong Pharmaceutical, Alvogen Korea, Dongwha Pharm, Korea United Pharm, Korea Biochem Pharm, Hanmi Pharmaceutical and Sinil Pharmaceutical. Most of them received the preferential sales rights in last August, as their preceding case allowed them to meet the qualifications of filing and winning the first patent challenge. Accordingly, the companies would be able to release their generics early beginning from Jan 8, 2024. The patent dispute around Forxiga started from 2015. The companies developing the generics first challenged the pharmaceutical formulation patent. They both won the negative patent scope confirmation and the patent nullification cases. The generic companies also challenged the substance patent. Forxiga has two substance patents. One is to expire on Apr. 7, 2023, and another one on Jan. 8, 2024. The latest decision was made on the patent expiring on Jan. 8, 2024. A legal expert commented, “The second patent was on a compound sharing a different number of carbons compared to another original substance. Based on the similarities, the Patent Court has reportedly stated the Forxiga substance lacked novelty and non-obviousness.” However, the generic companies failed to overcome the patent expiring in 2023. Only Dong-A ST with the ‘prodrug’ strategy won the first trial. Refusing to accept the Board’s decision, AstraZeneca has filed an appeal to the Patent Court to revoke the decision. If Dong-A ST also wins the second trial, it would be able to precede the launch of other follow-on drugs with the preferential sales rights by about seven months.
Policy
Special agreement for re-evaluation of α-GPC is urgent
by
Lee, Jeong-Hwan
Nov 02, 2020 06:12am
Nam In-soon a member of Democratic Party of Korea Nam In-soon, a member of Democratic Party of Korea, stressed that there is a need for a 'special contract to return the reimbursement price' between the NHIS and pharmaceutical companis that applied for the clinical re-evaluation of Choline alfoscerate. In clinical reevaluation, a pharmaceutical company that failed to prove the usefulness of Choline alfoscerate for indications other than dementia should sign a special contract to return the entire reimbursement price paid during the reevaluation period to prevent unfair pharmaceutical companies from applying for reevaluation for the purpose of deleting the indication or avoiding damage. She raised the need for a special contract for returning Choline alfoscerate reimbursement, and furthermore, the Health Insurance Act, which reimburses pharmaceutical companies unfair benefits according to the results of winning or losing administrative litigations such as drug price cuts and positive list system, or compensating for damages to pharmaceutical companies caused by the government's incorrect disposition. The revised bill is also planned. On the 28th, she said that the deadline for submitting the application for clinical reevaluation of Choline alfoscerate is less than two months, so it is urgent to issue an executive order for the special contract to return the reimbursement of the MOHW. The MFDS announced December 23 as the deadline for submission of clinical reevaluation plan for Choline alfoscerate. Accordingly, 134 pharmaceutical companies with Choline alfoscerate are preparing to submit re-evaluation plans for 255 items. She believes that prior to reevaluation, Pharmaceuticals with Choline Alfoscerate and the NHIS should sign a special agreement to return all reimbursement prices paid by the pharmaceutical company within the reevaluation period in case of clinical failure, so that pharmaceutical companies which apply for reevaluation will be able to delay the duration of indication maintenance. In particular, she pointed out that it would be difficult to prevent unnecessary damage of health insurance finances because there is no basis for returning the reimbursement price of Choline alfoscerate sold by pharmaceutical companies during the clinical reevaluation period, which takes more than 3 years if the drug efficacy fails to prove unless a special contract is signed. In addition, for a special agreement between Choline alfoscerate pharmaceutical company and the HIRA, the procedure for issuing an administrative order is required by the MOHW, but it is not enough time because the administrative order procedure must be followed before the deadline for the application for reevaluation. Beyond clinical re-evaluation of Choline alfoscerate, she was also contemplating a revised bill of the Health Insurance Act related to the administrative disposition of pharmaceutical reimbursement such as drug price reduction and positive list system. In this year's National Audit of the Health and Welfare Committee, as pharmaceutical companies' administrative lawsuits for cancellation of notifications and provisional disposition for suspension of execution became issues, the necessity to advance lawsuits related to the drug price of Choline alfoscerate as well as all medicines emerged. As a single example, there is no legal regulation that allows the government to return the amount of prescriptions and benefits for indications other than dementia paid during the period following the first trial, a trial on an appeal case, and a trial at the Supreme Court when the pharmaceutical companies in the Colin Alpo lawsuit finally lose. This is why there are criticisms that it is highly likely that pharmaceutical companies will abuse the lawsuit to neutralize the effect of drug price cuts or delay the effective time to pursue unfair drug prescription profits. Assuming the actions the MOHW can take if Choline alfoscerate pharmaceutical company loses under the current legal system, it is about the disposition of government loss payment notice and reimbursement claim against the unpaid pharmaceutical company. This means that the reimbursement redemption is not legalized, so separate administrative orders and additional lawsuits are carried out. In response, she plans to make an amendment to the Health Insurance Act to compensate for the unfair repayment of pharmaceutical companies' unfair benefits according to the results of a drug price reduction lawsuit between the pharmaceutical company and the government, or to compensate for the damages in sales of drugs that pharmaceutical companies unfairly suffered due to government administrative measures. In a drug price cut lawsuit, it is a two-way bill that establishes a law to recover unfair benefits incurred during the lawsuit if a pharmaceutical company loses, and calculates and compensates the damage caused by the disposition by the government, such as drug price cuts. She plans to collect opinions from the MOHW, the MFDS, the NHIS, and the HIRA, as well as domestic and foreign pharmaceutical companies, civic groups, and related academic societies. Since the impact on the government administration and pharmaceutical industry is great, the goal is to collect opinions from various fields and reflect them in the legislation. She said the immediate urgent thing is that the MOHW issues an executive order to sign reimbursement return contract between the pharmaceutical company and the NHIS before the MFDS conducts clinical reevaluation of Choline alfoscerate. She also explained that the contract could eliminate the cases of pharmaceutical companies applying for unfair re-evaluation and prevent possible financial damage to health insurance during the re-evaluation period. In addition, she said that she plans to promote legislation to supplement and improve problems arising from administrative disposition lawsuits related to drug prices, including lawsuits for canceling Choline alfoscerate’s positive list system and temporary disposition for suspension of execution. In addition, she emphasized that the major framework of the current legislation is to redeem the treasury for unfair benefits when a pharmaceutical company loses and to compensate for unnecessary sales damage suffered by pharmaceutical companies when the government loses.
Opinion
[Reporter's view]Double regulation of penalties for rebates
by
Lee, Jeong-Hwan
Nov 02, 2020 06:12am
Rebates in the Pharmaceutical Industry's trick to `ship to pharmacies' has been repeated for decades. Some of them are established as practice and are taken for granted. During the two-week grace period given by the MFDS prior to the suspension of sale, pharmaceutical companies are actually making total sales by releasing drugs that cannot be sold for three months (6 months of second detection) to pharmacies. The grace period given to alleviate discomfort for patients taking medication is rather abused as a intensive promotion period for disposal items of Rebates in the Pharmaceutical Industry. Moreover, the inconvenience of pharmacists who have to pre-order stocks in order to dispense drugs that will be temporarily sold out due to the suspension of sales is also aggravated. The 21st National Assembly Health and Welfare Committee urged the MFDS to realize regulations as a result of eradicating disease. Kang Seon-woo, a member of Democratic Party of Korea focused on current regulations that do not directly punish pharmaceutical companies which have committed illegal administrative dispositions for rebates. The target of the disposition is pharmaceutical companies, but as they regulate medicines, the damage is transferred to patients who take medicine for disease treatment and to pharmacies in charge of dispensing. The sales of eight pharmaceutical companies, which were caught in rebates last year, sold items for sale within the two-week grace period was four times that of the previous month (the average sales growth rate of eight companies increased by 396%). The current regulation is a trickery that advances the timing of drugs to be sold during the disposal period within the grace period, and the effectiveness of suspension of sale is extremely low. Pharmacists are very embarrassed when they face a patient who gives out a prescription including out-of-stock drugs. In preparation for this, if a pharmacy pre-orders inventory as a temporary action, the nature of the ban on rebates is completely lost. Therefore, pharmacists are saying that the suspension of sales of rebate drugs should be replaced with punitive penalties imposed on pharmaceutical companies, or the prescription itself should be prevented by suspension of benefits. Earlier at the time of the parliamentary inspection, Lee Eui-kyung, Director of the MFDS, was reluctant to respond to the proposal that it was necessary to replace the suspension of sales with a fine. As the Health Insurance Act regulates lowering the rebate drug price and the Fair Trade Act also imposes penalties on rebate pharmaceutical companies, she is concerned that the collection of additional penalties under the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act may act as a double regulation. However, it was not appropriate as an answer to the improvement in the sale of illegal rebate drugs. In the case of illegal rebate violations prohibited by the current pharmacist law, the administrative disposition is 3 months suspension of sales at the first detection, 6 months suspension of sales at the second detection, and cancellation of the license for the third time. The fact that pharmacies and pharmacies and wholesalers of rebate items can be sold out without economic damage until the second detection, when the sale is suspended for six months, can trigger an unfair result of allowing two rebates. The eradication of illegal rebates is an obligation that the MFDS must take the lead. It is also the duty of the MFDS to make invalid sales suspensions ineffective by collecting a penalty surcharge. If the Health Insurance Act's drug price cut and the Fair Trade Act penalty are not in place of the suspension of rebate sales, shouldn't the imposition of the substitute penalty for the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act be viewed as a legitimate and legitimate punishment rather than an overlapping or excessive regulation?
Policy
Vildagliptin generic preferential sales date may get delayed
by
Lee, Tak-Sun
Oct 30, 2020 05:55am
A diabetic treatment ‘Galvus’ by Novartis The preferential sales rights Ahn-gook Pharmaceutical has earned for the Galvus (vildagliptin) generic could be cut as a higher court trial has overturned the patent litigation decision. Accordingly, the South Korea’s Ministry of Food and Drug Safety (MFDS) is internally reviewing the matter. On Oct. 29, the Patent Court has partially ruled in favor of Novartis that filed litigation against Ahn-gook Pharmaceutical and Hanmi Pharmaceutical to cancel the decision made to nullify the extended term of Galvus substance patent term. Previously, the Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board stated 187 days out of 26 months and 23 days of the extended Galvus patent term would be nullified. The deducted number of days (MFDS approval review supplementary evidence submission period) delayed the patent term coming in effect due to the patentee’s liability. Hence the Board stated the extended term was unjust. Based on the Board’s decision, Ahn-gook Pharmaceutical was able to nab the preferential sales rights over the Galvus generic ‘Ahngook Vildagliptin tablet.’ The preferential sales rights would be effective from Aug. 30 2021 through May 29 2022, or from 187 days prior to the patent expiration (Mar. 4, 2022). Regardless, the Patent Court said otherwise and stood on the side of Novartis unlike the Board. Although the specifics were not disclosed as the full decision is not yet opened to the public, the sources report the nullified period would be significantly less than 187 days. Now that the higher court has overturned the decision, some claim the effective term of the preferential sales rights Ahn-gook Pharmaceutical won should be shortened in accordance to the Patent Court’s decision. An industry insider commented, “For a precedent of the court accepting the litigation against the extended patent term nullification, there was an interpretation that the preferential sales rights was only effective for the period deducted due to the partially nullified extended patent term. So it would make sense to deduct the number of effective days as well.” Another industry insider said, “They just need to change the effective dates of preferential sales rights stated on the indication. Nevertheless, the change in number of effective days would not impact the industry greatly, as only Ahn-gook Pharmaceutical’s subsidiary Ahngook Newpharm won the preferential sales rights, and the number of deducted days was insignificant.” However, MFDS is contemplating about the situation; so far, since the system was implemented from 2015, the number of effective preferential sales rights days has never been changed. But if the number of days is changed, the same substance sales ban period would also get affected and create an inevitable ripple effect on the follow-on drug market. A MFDS official said, “When either one of the patentee or the preferential sales right holder reports the final outcome to MFDS, the ministry would need to have an extensive internal discussion. We cannot provide any clear answer immediately.” Depending on Ahn-gook Pharmaceutical’s preferential sales rights period, the fate of other companies with the follow-on drugs would be decided as well. Hanmi Pharmaceutical, although it did not win the preferential sales rights, can release its incrementally modified drug (IMD) along with Ahn-gook Pharmacetuical as the IMD has a different salt base.
<
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
>