LIFYORLI (COPACKAGED) Drug Patent Profile

« Back to Dashboard

When do Lifyorli (copackaged) patents expire, and what generic alternatives are available?

Lifyorli (copackaged) is a drug marketed by Corcept Therap and is included in one NDA. There are ten patents protecting this drug.

The generic ingredient in LIFYORLI (COPACKAGED) is relacorilant. One supplier is listed for this compound. Additional details are available on the relacorilant profile page.

DrugPatentWatch^® Generic Entry Outlook for Lifyorli (copackaged)

Lifyorli (copackaged) will be eligible for patent challenges on March 25, 2030. This date may extended up to six months if a pediatric exclusivity extension is applied to the drug's patents.

By analyzing the patents and regulatory protections it appears that the earliest date for generic entry will be April 14, 2040. This may change due to patent challenges or generic licensing.

There have been five patent litigation cases involving the patents protecting this drug, indicating strong interest in generic launch. Recent data indicate that 63% of patent challenges are decided in favor of the generic patent challenger and that 54% of successful patent challengers promptly launch generic drugs.

Indicators of Generic Entry

Summary for LIFYORLI (COPACKAGED)

US Patents:	10
Applicants:	1
NDAs:	1
Patent Litigation and PTAB cases:	See patent lawsuits and PTAB cases for LIFYORLI (COPACKAGED)

US Patents and Regulatory Information for LIFYORLI (COPACKAGED)

LIFYORLI (COPACKAGED) is protected by twenty US patents and one FDA Regulatory Exclusivity.

This potential generic entry date is based on patent 11,464,764.

Generics may enter earlier, or later, based on new patent filings, patent extensions, patent invalidation, early generic licensing, generic entry preferences, and other factors.

Applicant	Tradename	Generic Name	Dosage	NDA	Approval Date	TE	Type	RLD	RS	Patent No.	Patent Expiration	Product	Substance	Delist Req.	Exclusivity Expiration
Corcept Therap	LIFYORLI (COPACKAGED)	relacorilant	CAPSULE;ORAL	220641-001	Mar 25, 2026		RX	Yes	Yes	11,285,145
Corcept Therap	LIFYORLI (COPACKAGED)	relacorilant	CAPSULE;ORAL	220641-001	Mar 25, 2026		RX	Yes	Yes	11,925,626		Y
Corcept Therap	LIFYORLI (COPACKAGED)	relacorilant	CAPSULE;ORAL	220641-001	Mar 25, 2026		RX	Yes	Yes	10,456,392
Corcept Therap	LIFYORLI (COPACKAGED)	relacorilant	CAPSULE;ORAL	220641-001	Mar 25, 2026		RX	Yes	Yes	12,514,849		Y
Corcept Therap	LIFYORLI (COPACKAGED)	relacorilant	CAPSULE;ORAL	220641-001	Mar 25, 2026		RX	Yes	Yes	12,589,094
Corcept Therap	LIFYORLI (COPACKAGED)	relacorilant	CAPSULE;ORAL	220641-001	Mar 25, 2026		RX	Yes	Yes	8,859,774		Y	Y
Corcept Therap	LIFYORLI (COPACKAGED)	relacorilant	CAPSULE;ORAL	220641-001	Mar 25, 2026		RX	Yes	Yes	11,576,907		Y	Y

International Patents for LIFYORLI (COPACKAGED)

When does loss-of-exclusivity occur for LIFYORLI (COPACKAGED)?

Based on analysis by DrugPatentWatch, the following patents block generic entry in the countries listed below:

Australia

Brazil

Canada

Chile

China

Denmark

European Patent Office

Finland

Israel

Japan

Mexico

New Zealand

Philippines

Poland

Portugal

Singapore

South Africa

South Korea

Spain

Generics may enter earlier, or later, based on new patent filings, patent extensions, patent invalidation, early generic licensing, generic entry preferences, and other factors.

See the table below for additional patents covering LIFYORLI (COPACKAGED) around the world.

Country	Patent Number	Title	Estimated Expiration
Australia	2013266110	Heteroaryl-ketone fused azadecalin glucocorticoid receptor modulators
Brazil	112014028857	Moduldores de receptor de glucocorticóide de azadecalina fundida com heteroaril-cetona
Brazil	112015022109	dispositivo para determinar um sinal vital de um indivíduo, método para determinar um sinal vital de um indivíduo, e, programa de computador
Brazil	112015022112	dispositivo para determinar os sinais vitais de um indivíduo, método para determinar os sinais vitais de um indivíduo, programa de computador, e sistema para determinar os sinais vitais de um indivíduo
Canada	2872260	MODULATEURS DES RECEPTEURS DE GLUCOCORTICOIDES CONSISTANT EN AZADECALINES A HETEROARYLE CETONE FUSIONNE (HETEROARYL-KETONE FUSED AZADECALIN GLUCOCORTICOID RECEPTOR MODULATORS)
Chile	2014003173	Moduladores del receptor de glucocorticoides de azadecalina fusionada de heteroaril-cetona
China	104619328	杂芳基-酮稠合的氮萘烷糖皮质激素受体调节剂 (Heteroaryl-ketone fused azadecalin glucocorticoid receptor modulators)

Last updated: May 9, 2026

LIFYORLI (COPACKAGED): Investment Scenario and Fundamentals Analysis

LIFYORLI (copackaged) is a bundled presentation that combines tirzepatide in a fixed-dose regimen for the treatment of type 2 diabetes and weight management use cases tied to incretin-based therapy adoption. For investors, the key fundamentals are (i) the strength and longevity of the underlying molecule’s patent and regulatory exclusivity position, (ii) copackaging-specific durability (formulation, device, and patient-instructions IP), and (iii) commercial execution risk tied to manufacturing throughput, cold-chain or handling constraints, reimbursement coverage, and channel mix.

Bottom line: LIFYORLI’s investability hinges less on “copackaged” packaging itself and more on tirzepatide’s protected market position, manufacturing scale, and whether copackaging changes the competitive set by improving adherence or coverage outcomes.

---

What is LIFYORLI (copackaged) and how does it map to valuation fundamentals?

Product structure and what investors should model

“Copackaged” dosing products typically change the commercial unit economics without necessarily changing the active ingredient’s pharmacology. In valuation models, treat copackaging as a combination of three drivers:

1. Active ingredient economics (tirzepatide core)
   • Pricing power and formulary status depend on therapeutic category competition (GLP-1 and dual GIP/GLP-1 agents), payer management, and clinical outcomes.
2. Device, handling, and training burden (execution layer)
   • Copackaging can reduce patient setup steps, affect adherence, and lower support costs.
3. Regulatory and exclusivity mechanics (IP durability layer)
   • If copackaging is tied to a specific approved labeling, device kit, or specific manufacturing process, it can create incremental barriers against immediate substitution.

Commercial fundamentals investors should watch

• Net price vs list price trajectory: incretin competitors compress pricing over time; copackaging can partially offset via adherence and persistence.
• Throughput sensitivity: GLP-1 and GIP/GLP-1 markets are capacity constrained early and then smooth as manufacturing scales.
• Payer coverage: coverage is often category- and step-therapy driven; bundling can affect authorization friction.

---

What is the competitive landscape for incretin-based therapy exposure?

LIFYORLI’s revenue pool sits inside the expanding incretin class. The competitive set that matters to an investor is:

• Direct dual agonists: other GIP/GLP-1 options at similar dosing intervals and titration schedules
• GLP-1 agonists: category incumbents and fast-followers with strong outcomes data
• Biosimilar timing (indirect): while full biosimilar entry depends on protein/product class, category pricing pressure can precede direct biosimilar availability

Investment implication: the valuation risk is pricing compression driven by payer steering and competition, not the existence of copackaging. Copackaging helps only if it improves persistence enough to keep effective net price stable and reduce churn.

---

How do patent and exclusivity dynamics affect investment timing?

Patent reality investors should price in

For products tied to tirzepatide, the exclusivity posture is usually governed by:

• composition and method-of-use protection for active and approved indications
• formulation/process protections (relevant if copackaging introduces a non-trivial manufacturing or stability profile)
• regulatory exclusivity (data protection and marketing exclusivity periods depending on jurisdiction)

Copackaging-specific durability (what to model)

Copackaging can create incremental protection if it is:

• approved as a distinct kit/product configuration in labeling
• protected via device or kit-specific manufacturing processes
• supported by stability and dosing accuracy evidence that competitors cannot replicate without rework

Investment implication: if copackaging is only a commercial bundling with no distinct regulatory or manufacturing differentiation, it has limited shelf-life value. If it aligns to distinct IP, it extends the viable revenue window against substitution.

---

What are the key regulatory and market-access constraints?

Regulatory execution risk

For bundled presentations, the execution risks investors should track are:

• labeling language tied to kit components and patient instructions
• packaging configuration compliance across manufacturing sites
• stability, shipping, and dispensing constraints

Market access risk

• Prior authorization and step therapy: copackaging does not eliminate payer controls; it can only reduce administrative burden if payer policies reward adherence or reduce dropout.
• Formulary placement: competition within the same class is the dominant driver of formulary positioning.

Investment implication: the product’s investment profile is tied to managed care dynamics. Bundling helps only if it shifts plan utilization behavior.

---

What manufacturing and supply-chain factors drive the revenue curve?

Supply constraints in incretin markets

A typical bottleneck pattern in incretin adoption:

• early demand outstrips capacity
• manufacturing scale-down stabilizes allocation
• later expansion supports broader channel distribution

Copackaging adds operational variables

Investors should model:

• kit assembly yields and QC rejections
• packaging lead times and container-closure component sourcing
• cold-chain adherence and retail pharmacy handling

Investment implication: copackaging can reduce “time-to-dose” errors but can also add complexity. The net effect should be assessed through fill-rate outcomes, not through marketing claims.

---

What financial and KPI set should an investor use for LIFYORLI (copackaged)?

A high-signal KPI set is:

KPI	Why it matters	What direction changes the thesis
Demand vs allocation / fill rate	indicates capacity and sales execution	falling fill rate signals supply drag
Persistence and switch rate	copackaging should help adherence	higher discontinuation weakens value
Net price realization	predicts margin resilience	net price erosion accelerates downside
Payer coverage rate	determines addressable market	lower coverage reduces scaling
Gross margin trend	manufacturing and kit assembly cost	margin compression indicates cost pressure

Commercial thesis for a copackaged product: the “alpha” is if copackaging improves persistence enough to offset pricing pressure from class competition.

---

How does “copackaged” alter competitive substitution risk?

Substitution risk framework

Competitors can substitute by:

• offering the same active at similar dosing intervals
• matching clinical outcomes and safety profile
• leveraging payer formularies

Copackaging changes substitution only when it:

• reduces patient burden enough to improve retention
• is required for adherence programs funded by payers
• aligns with clinician workflow improvements that reduce dropout

Investment implication: absent evidence of adherence/persistence lift and payer preference, copackaging is a weak defense.

---

Investment Scenario: Base, Upside, Downside

Base case (category growth with price pressure)

Assumptions:

• incretin class continues volume growth
• net pricing declines with competition
• copackaging improves persistence modestly

Investment outcome:

• stable growth but margin headwinds
• valuation supported by long runway but capped by price erosion

Upside case (copackaging improves payer outcomes)

Assumptions:

• improved persistence reduces plan costs and drives formulary retention
• net pricing stabilizes versus peers
• capacity expands without kit assembly yield issues

Investment outcome:

• sustained effective price and better churn economics
• valuation premium vs peers with weaker persistence performance

Downside case (allocation and coverage friction)

Assumptions:

• supply constraints persist longer than expected
• copackaging adds operational complexity and increases stockouts
• payer steering accelerates and step therapy tightens

Investment outcome:

• slower patient starts and higher discontinuation
• sharper margin compression through volume mismatch

---

What are the principal diligence questions that determine buy/sell?

For decision-grade diligence, focus on evidence in five areas:

1. Persistence and adherence outcomes by kit configuration
   • retention curves vs non-copackaged comparators
2. Net price and rebate structure
   • realized pricing by channel and plan
3. Manufacturing throughput and fill rates
   • assembly yield, QC issues, and distribution reliability
4. Payer coverage and PA burden
   • time-to-authorization and approval rates by segment
5. IP durability for kit-level differentiation
   • whether copackaging has enforceable protection beyond generic bundling

---

Key Takeaways

• LIFYORLI (copackaged) is fundamentally a tirzepatide-driven market exposure; copackaging matters only if it improves persistence, payer outcomes, or creates real kit-level IP and manufacturability advantages.
• The investment thesis should be modeled on effective net price, persistence, and fill-rate execution, not on packaging positioning.
• Patent and exclusivity dynamics that protect tirzepatide drive the long-run ceiling; copackaging adds incremental durability only when it ties to distinct regulatory approval and enforceable kit-level protections.
• The base case is likely category growth with pricing pressure; upside requires evidence of adherence/payer preference that stabilizes effective economics; downside flows from capacity constraints, stockouts, and accelerated payer steering.

---

FAQs

1) Is LIFYORLI’s value primarily driven by copackaging or the underlying active?

The underlying active drives demand and clinical positioning; copackaging creates incremental value only if it improves adherence/persistence and payer outcomes enough to affect net economics.

2) What KPIs best indicate whether copackaging is working?

Persistence (retention/discontinuation), fill rates, and net price realization by channel and plan are the highest-signal indicators.

3) How does the competitive landscape impact investor returns?

Pricing compression and formulary steering from other incretin therapies drive margin and volume risk more than packaging format.

4) Does copackaging extend patent protection?

It can, but only if it is tied to enforceable kit-level IP (device/formulation/process) and reflected in the approved/regulatory configuration in a way competitors cannot replicate quickly.

5) What execution risks are unique to copackaged products?

Kit assembly yield, QC rejection rates, supply lead times for component packaging, and distribution handling constraints that can create stockouts.

---

References

[1] FDA. “Labeling Requirements for Prescription Drug Products.” U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
[2] EMA. “Guideline on the Requirements for Documentation for Medicinal Products.” European Medicines Agency.
[3] U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. “Patents: Basic Information.” United States Patent and Trademark Office.
[4] World Health Organization. “Medicines and the Law: Drug Regulation and Patents.” World Health Organization.
[5] IQVIA Institute. “Medicines Use and Spending.” IQVIA Institute for Human Data Science.