When will the patents on CYSTADROPS expire, and when will CYSTADROPS go generic?

Subscribe to access the full database, or Start Trial
Applicant	Tradename	Generic Name	Dosage	NDA	Approval Date	TE	Type	RLD	RS	Patent No.	Patent Expiration	Product	Substance	Delist Req.	Exclusivity Expiration
Recordati Rare	CYSTADROPS	cysteamine hydrochloride	SOLUTION/DROPS;OPHTHALMIC	211302-001	Aug 19, 2020		RX	Yes	Yes	⤷ Start Trial	⤷ Start Trial				⤷ Start Trial
>Applicant	>Tradename	>Generic Name	>Dosage	>NDA	>Approval Date	>TE	>Type	>RLD	>RS	>Patent No.	>Patent Expiration	>Product	>Substance	>Delist Req.	>Exclusivity Expiration

Last updated: July 17, 2026

CYSTADROPS (active ingredient: cysteamine hydrochloride, ophthalmic) is a niche ophthalmology product with valuation drivers tied to: (1) U.S. market exclusivity and patent coverage on the specific eye-drop formulation and use, (2) FDA approval pathway status, (3) settlement and Paragraph IV risk if generic/ANDA attempts arise, and (4) the company’s ability to defend manufacturing and supply continuity while expanding access in target segments (pediatric and adult cystinosis-related ocular disease).

What is CYSTADROPS and how does it make money in cystinosis-related ocular disease?

Cystinosis and ocular burden drive demand. CYSTADROPS is used in the treatment of corneal cystine accumulation in patients with cystinosis. The product is positioned in a rare-disease regimen where chronic dosing and specialty distribution typically stabilize demand but cap addressable volume.

Commercial fundamentals that matter for investors

Treatment duration: chronic use increases lifetime value per patient, but the total patient population is small.
Specialty channel dependence: revenue sensitivity to formulary placement, pharmacy benefit manager coverage, and specialty distributor performance.
Supply risk: ophthalmic sterility and cold-chain or stability constraints can create commercial disruption if manufacturing changes are required.
Competition risk: substitutes usually require either a different dosing schedule that patients tolerate or a generic equivalent that passes bioequivalence and clinical acceptance.

Investment conclusion from commercial structure

The revenue model is closer to a rare-disease chronic therapy than a high-throughput consumer ophthalmic product.
Upside tends to come from patient access expansion and route/formulation improvements, not from broad label expansion.

What is the FDA regulatory status of CYSTADROPS (approval pathway, exclusivity, and Orange Book listing)?

Featured-snippet answer: CYSTADROPS’s exclusivity and generic entry risk in the U.S. depend on (a) whether it is listed in the FDA Orange Book with active patents tied to the specific drug product and (b) the expiration of both patent rights and any relevant exclusivity periods.

Orange Book and exclusivity mechanics investors track

Patent listings determine the date after which an ANDA or 505(j) product can launch without infringement risk (or after litigation resolution).
Five-year new chemical entity exclusivity and/or Orphan Drug exclusivity can delay generic competition even if patents are expiring.
30-month stay and litigation cadence shape the launch timing of first generic challengers.

What investors should map for CYSTADROPS

Orange Book listing type per patent: drug substance, drug product/formulation, and method of use.
Any orphan exclusivity (if applicable to this product) and its end date.
Whether the product has a history of Paragraph IV filings (or settlement agreements that establish entry timelines).

What patents protect CYSTADROPS in the US, and how many patents cover the key claims?

Featured-snippet answer: CYSTADROPS’s enforceable estate usually clusters around three claim buckets: ophthalmic composition/formulation, stability/shelf-life and manufacturing, and method of use tied to cystinosis ocular management. The number and remaining term of these patents determines how long a generic can be blocked.

How patent estates typically structure for ophthalmic cysteamine

Drug substance and salts (cysteamine hydrochloride composition claims).
Formulation patents (eye-drop composition, excipients, pH, concentration, stabilizers, viscosity/tonicity, packaging-related parameters).
Method-of-use patents (dosing regimens, patient populations, corneal delivery and regimen timing).
Manufacturing/process patents (sterile production steps, stability-preserving methods, filling/packaging controls).

Investment implication

If CYSTADROPS has multiple formulation and method-of-use patents still in force, the economic value of the asset extends beyond mere NCE/orphan exclusivity.
If the estate is thin and mostly drug-substance anchored, generic entry timing can become faster and valuations compress.

When does CYSTADROPS lose exclusivity in the US (patent expiration and exclusivity timeline)?

Featured-snippet answer: Generic pressure timing is driven by the later of: the last expiring listed patent covering the approved drug product and the last expiring statutory exclusivity (if present).

Investor timeline framework

Patent expiration (hard stop for infringement risk unless a court rules invalid/non-infringed).
Regulatory exclusivity expiration (soft stop that can still block approval or force labeling restrictions).
Launch window after:
- FDA approval (ANDA approval date), and
- post-30-month stay or post-settlement entry date, and
- any pediatric exclusivity extensions (if applicable to the product’s approval history).

Practical investment use

Model a base case launch date for generic entry using the latest relevant patent/exclusivity expiration.
Model a risk case where a court invalidates or narrows key claims, shifting entry earlier.

Are there Paragraph IV challenges or ANDA/505(j) filings for CYSTADROPS?

Featured-snippet answer: The first material stock-price-moving catalyst for a niche orphan ophthalmic product is typically an FDA ANDA filing with a Paragraph IV certification tied to CYSTADROPS Orange Book patents, followed by litigation or settlement.

What to check in the investment model

Existence of Paragraph IV notice letters.
Filed ANDA sponsors and the certified patents they challenge.
Whether the first filer requests approval “at risk” or after settlement.

How this affects valuation

Paragraph IV trials create:
- potential value cliffs (generic entry can be rational and fast after a favorable court decision),
- or value support via settlements that fix an entry date.

What patent litigation affects CYSTADROPS, and what are typical settlement outcomes investors model?

Featured-snippet answer: For ophthalmic niche assets, litigation typically ends with either a:

court-driven earlier or later launch, or
settlement setting a fixed entry date, sometimes with design-around concessions.

Litigation modeling inputs

Whether asserted patents are formulation (harder to design around without altering stability and bioequivalence) or method-of-use (often easier to shift labeling strategies, but still affects exclusivity).
Whether settlements include:
- entry date,
- labeling restrictions,
- launch-technology commitments.

Investment takeaway

The highest-confidence downside protection is a dense formulation patent cluster with remaining term and no observed successful design-arounds in similar ophthalmic cysteamine products.

What generic entry risks exist for CYSTADROPS ophthalmic drops (design-around, bioequivalence, and labeling)?

Featured-snippet answer: Generic substitution risk depends on whether challengers can pass FDA bioequivalence and avoid infringement of any formulation or method-of-use patents that remain.

Risk pathways for generics

Composition/design-around risk: changing excipients, pH, stabilizers, or packaging can reduce infringement risk but must still satisfy stability and bioequivalence.
Method-of-use labeling risk: even if the product is approved, infringement risk may come from how the label describes dosing or patient selection.
Manufacturing risk: sterility and stability often create real-world execution barriers even when patent barriers are cleared.

Investor lens

If CYSTADROPS’s strongest patents cover formulation stability and specific excipient ratios, generic economics may be delayed due to formulation work and stability validation.

What formulations are protected by CYSTADROPS patents (drug product composition, concentrations, pH, excipients, packaging)?

Featured-snippet answer: Formulation patent scope determines whether a competitor can market a “same active, different formulation” product that still meets approval requirements without infringing.

Typical ophthalmic formulation protection targets

pH window and buffering systems that preserve cysteamine stability.
Antioxidants or stabilizers that reduce degradation over shelf-life.
Tonicity agents that ensure tolerability and corneal compatibility.
Viscosity modifiers impacting corneal residence time.
Container-closure system affecting stability and extractables.

Investment implication

Broad claims around excipient categories can increase infringement risk for generics and raise likelihood of settlements.
Narrow claims tied to specific compositions can increase odds of a viable design-around.

How does CYSTADROPS compare with other cysteamine ophthalmic options (therapeutic and IP landscape)?

Featured-snippet answer: Investors should compare:

active ingredient identity (cysteamine),
dosage form (eye drops),
patient convenience and tolerability,
and the remaining patent lives of each marketed option.

Competitive analysis dimensions

Formulation differentiation: stability and comfort can affect adherence, especially in pediatric populations.
Dosing frequency: higher frequency increases the value of adherence-improving formulations.
Access and pricing: specialty pricing and payer coverage can dominate head-to-head outcomes.

Which companies are likely to compete with CYSTADROPS, and who is most exposed to generic substitution?

Featured-snippet answer: The set of potential competitors in the U.S. typically includes:

established ophthalmic specialty generics with ANDA pipelines, and
firms with capability to formulate and scale sterile ophthalmic cysteamine products.

Most exposed business segments

the incumbent distributor and manufacturer tied to CYSTADROPS supply,
any licensee-dependent revenue stream if it relies on strong marketing exclusivity,
and the company carrying the highest fixed costs in manufacturing if market erosion occurs.

What is the upside case for CYSTADROPS (growth drivers and probability-weighted value)?

Upside drivers that typically apply

Access expansion: higher patient coverage through specialty channels and formularies.
Conversion/retention: improved patient adherence due to tolerability, packaging, or reduced irritation.
Global expansion: if regulatory submissions exist in other jurisdictions where patent coverage supports value capture.
Product line extension: new strengths, delivery formats, or adjacent cysteamine ocular formulations.

Value creation logic

In rare disease, valuation uplift is usually a function of net price durability plus incremental patient access rather than volume multiples.

What is the downside case for CYSTADROPS (patent cliff, pricing pressure, and supply disruption)?

Downside scenario hierarchy

Generic or authorized competitor entry triggered by:
- expiration of key patents,
- favorable Paragraph IV outcomes,
- or settlements that set a nearer entry date.
Payer pressure after entry, with price compression and reduced net-to-gross.
Supply events that disrupt stable chronic therapy and trigger patient switching to alternative cysteamine products.

Probability-weighted modeling

The dominant risk is the timing of entry relative to remaining patent/exclusivity term.

Key Takeaways

CYSTADROPS is a rare-disease ophthalmic therapy where valuation hinges on patent and exclusivity timing, not just FDA approval quality.
Investor-grade analysis requires mapping Orange Book-listed patents into formulation, manufacturing, and method-of-use claim buckets to gauge design-around difficulty.
The highest-stakes catalyst is a Paragraph IV challenge (or settlement) that sets a credible generic entry date.
Base-to-risk valuation sensitivity is driven by: (1) last expiring listed patent, (2) presence of statutory exclusivity, (3) litigation posture, and (4) the likelihood that challengers can pass stability and bioequivalence for a cysteamine eye-drop formulation.

FAQs

1) What Orange Book patents typically block an ANDA for cysteamine eye drops?
Formulation and method-of-use patents tied to the approved drug product composition and dosing regimen usually drive infringement risk.

2) How do formulation patents affect generic “same active” cysteamine eye drops?
They can force challengers to redesign excipients, pH, stabilizers, and container-closure systems while still passing bioequivalence and stability expectations.

3) What litigation events change the expected generic entry date for CYSTADROPS?
Early claim construction, denial of preliminary injunctions, and final invalidity/non-infringement judgments; settlements that fix an entry date also reset timelines.

4) Does orphan drug exclusivity typically matter for rare ocular therapies like CYSTADROPS?
Yes, if applicable, it can delay approval even when some patents expire.

5) What commercial indicators best predict when CYSTADROPS price erosion will occur?
Specialty payer formulary changes, net-to-gross deterioration, and early channel stocking behavior around an anticipated entry window.

References

FDA. Orange Book: Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations. U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
FDA. Drug Patent Expirations and Applications (DPEA). U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
FDA. FDA Orange Book Exclusivity and Patent Listings guidance. U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
21 U.S.C. § 355(j) (Hatch-Waxman framework for ANDAs and Paragraph IV).

CYSTADROPS Drug Patent Profile

Which patents cover Cystadrops, and when can generic versions of Cystadrops launch?

AI Deep Research

Questions you can ask:

Summary for CYSTADROPS

US Patents and Regulatory Information for CYSTADROPS

CYSTADROPS Investment Scenario and Fundamentals Analysis (Patent, Regulatory, and Competitive Risk, US and Global)