Indian patent office has Swiss pharma chief F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG has denied the patent for preparing the drug, which means that after the opposition of the former subsidy by the Indian drug alliance, the injection skin means to treat breast cancer (IPA). The company has claimed that the method, which has many benefits compared to injections of the veins, is useful in cancer medicines such as Trastuzumab (Hercetin) and Pertuzumab (Perjeta).
In the order issued by the Patent and Assistant Controller of Design, Chennai, the Patent Office said that no invention step is included in the claim of patent application and patents are not eligible under the provisions of the Patent Act, 1970. Therefore, the Authority refused to proceed with a patent application to give patents under section 15 of the Patent Act, 1970. In response to the application of a National Phase, it was decided that in January 2012 Roche had filed for the invention of Dangerous Anti-HER2 Antibody Formulation. In January 2015, the IPA filed its protest against grant of patent, after which the hearing was done in January 2017.
About the Roche
According to the filing by Roche with the box office:
• The application was on an invention related to highly concentrate stable pharmaceutical formulations of anti-HER2 antibodies, which is used to treat such molecules for the treatment of breast cancer or for under-the-under injection.
• Subcutaneous injection is a method of injecting medicine with a small needle in the tissue layer between the skin and the muscle.
• In many instances antibodies are injected with intravenous, through this path there are various limitations in the quantity of controlled medication, under the injection, the medical doctor allows therapist to treat the patient in a brief intervention, and the patient can be trained to do injections themselves, which means that looking at a hospital a administer dose Does not require care.
• It could also help the doctor to administer multiple doses at multiple sites of the body surface.
Rejection grounds of various Pharmaceutical companies
• The invention is anticipated given the information in the previously published patents.
• The invention is obvious and lacks inventive step.
• It is not patentable under Section 3(d) and 3(e) of the Patent Act.
Disclosing the arguments of the IPA that the invention was estimated and the only exploration within the meaning of Section 3 (D) of the Act, the patent office, However, it found that Roche’s claims did not include any invention steps, and the subject of the patent sought by the company was only a substance derived from a blending which was in the merger of the qualities, which is patent under the provisions of section 3 (e) is not of the Act.
Roche has been working on this construction for many years and it has been claimed before that the Herceptin SC (subcutaneous) patients with traditional under developed system due to their less aggressive administrative route and about 30 minutes of fast administration time of 30 minutes can provide more convenience 90 minutes.