EDITOR'S NOTE Q


Life Sciences IP Review is published by: Newton Media Limited   Bromley, BR11LT,


United Kingdom +44 203 301 8200


Director Nicholas Lipinski


Group publisher Peter Scott


Group editor Ed Conlon


Telephone: +44 203 301 8210 Email: econlon@newtonmedia.co.uk


News editor Max Walters


Reporters David Brooke, Leonie Mercedes


Editorial assistant Naomi Jeffreys


Sub-editor Ros Bromwich


Production and design Fisherman Creative


©Newton Media Limited 2015


All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electrical, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without the prior written permission of the publisher.


The views expressed in LSIPR are not necessarily those shared by the publisher, Newton Media Limited.  market, we have included articles from a number of sources, and the views expressed are those of the individual contributors. No responsibility or liability is accepted by Newton Media Limited for any loss to any person, legal or physical, as a result of any statement, LSIPR. This publication is not a substitute  The publication of advertisements does not represent endorsement by the publisher.


Life Sciences IP Review (LSIPR): ISSN 2049-2359 (Print)


Cover image: Jose Ramiro Laguna / Shutterstock.com


In 2014, LSIPR featured some of world’s top-selling drugs that were due to lose patent exclusivity that year. The list included the big hitters Copaxone, Nexium and Cymbalta, with Evista, Micardis, Restasis and Nasonex also  protection in 2015.


Looking down the list, you can see Gleevec, Lantus, Namenda, Abilify and Avodart/Jalyn, which will all have expired by November 20; one (Gleevec) expired on January 4. These drugs are made by some of the titans in the pharmaceutical industry, including Novartis and GlaxoSmithKline, and each drug individually is worth at least $1 billion per year.


The article is of interest for a number of reasons. Not only will it show which companies are going to face generic competition (if they haven’t already), and how well they are responding to that, but it will reveal how much money those companies are certainly not going to make for their relevant drug compared to last year. Do they have similar patented products to offer  (where applicable) react? These are just some of the questions you may be asking of the innovators.


By highlighting the markets that will see increased competition, the list will show which conditions are likely to be more affordable to treat. The types of illnesses treated by the drugs we have featured range from deadly diseases  Although not all the mentioned treatments are necessarily hugely expensive at the moment, surely any reduction in prices will be welcomed. We hope that the article will be a useful reference point for the remainder of the year. Enjoy reading it, and the rest of this issue’s content.


Ed Conlon, Group editor www.lifesciencesipreview.com Life Sciences Intellectual Property Review Volume 2, Issue 2 3 The effects of patent expiries


DMITRY KALINOVSKY / SHUTTERSTOCK.COM


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44