In two phase III studies, Merck & Co. Inc.’s oral, once monthly proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitor produced statistically significant and clinically meaningful cuts in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels. The PCSK9 inhibitor is looking to fit into a crowded market that already has well-established therapies from other big pharmas and a potential competitor in development to treat another indication.
The roadmap and conservative substitution methods Amgen Inc. laid out to “enable” its genus claims for antibodies that inhibit PCSK9 to lower LDL cholesterol are “little more than two research assignments,” the U.S. Supreme Court said in a unanimous opinion handed down May 18 in Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi SA that gave the win to Sanofi. The roadmap “merely describes step-by-step Amgen’s own trial-and-error method for finding functional antibodies — calling on scientists to create a wide range of candidate antibodies and then screen each to see which happen to bind to PCSK9 in the right place and block it from binding to LDL receptors,” the court said in the decision written by Justice Neil Gorsuch.
A lot of eyes and ears were tuned to the U.S. Supreme Court’s March 27 argument in Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi SA with its focus on how much enablement is necessary in broad genus patent claims.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit once again delved into genus claims as it affirmed Gilead Sciences Inc.’s win in its inter partes review (IPR) challenge of several claims in a patent held by the University of Minnesota.
In preparing for their showdown before the U.S. Supreme Court March 27 on what it takes to enable broad genus claims, both Sanofi SA and Amgen Inc. are warning that future innovation will be at stake if the court accepts the other company’s position.
New research published in BMJ Open claims there are inconsistencies in Amgen Inc.’s phase III Fourier study for cholesterol lowering. Cardiac deaths were numerically higher in those taking the PCSK9 inhibitor Repatha (evolocumab) combined with a statin than those in the placebo group, the research noted.
It’s taken eight years of jury trials, court reversals and appeals for Amgen Inc. to get the nod to argue its case before the U.S. Supreme Court on what is needed to meet the enablement standard for functional patent claims that envelop a genus.
If the U.S. Supreme Court agrees to hear Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. vs. Glaxosmithkline LLC, it could be one of the biggest biopharma cases on the court’s calendar in the coming year. But that’s still an if. Whether the patent infringement case involving a so-called “skinny label” makes it to the high court’s docket depends on which interpretation of the underlying question the court accepts.
The latest global regulatory news, changes and updates affecting biopharma, including: Fed Circuit agrees Amgen patents lack enablement; HC nudging along with regulatory modernization plan; EMA: No Sputnik application yet.
It has proved to be a lackluster summer for the biopharmaceutical sector, with the BioWorld Biopharmaceutical index dropping about 2% in value during the past two months, in contrast to the general markets that have enjoyed a much stronger period.
