When do the patents on MENTAX-TC expire, and when will generic MENTAX-TC be available?

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
Pharmobedient	MENTAX-TC	butenafine hydrochloride	CREAM;TOPICAL	021408-001	Oct 17, 2002		DISCN	No	No	⤷ 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 7, 2026

MENTAX-TC (menthol + camphor + topical steroid) Investment Scenario and Patent-Supply Fundamentals Analysis

Executive summary: MENTAX-TC is a branded topical dermatology product containing an anti-itch/analgesic counterirritant core (menthol and camphor) plus a topical corticosteroid component. Investment upside depends on (1) how long branded exclusivity persists in each relevant market, (2) whether the product’s Orange Book and patent estate (if applicable) block generic substitutes, (3) whether FDA/EMA labeling and manufacturing controls restrict AB-rated generic entry, and (4) the robustness of the company’s supply, reimbursement coverage, and channel position. On the fundamentals side, topical steroids/counterirritant combinations typically face rapid generic erosion absent strong, formulation- or method-of-use IP, so the key diligence question is whether the brand’s patent landscape is narrow “process” or “use” IP that does not prevent AB generics, or whether it includes enforceable formulation and/or device-delivery patents.

What is MENTAX-TC and what active ingredients determine its competitive value?

MENTAX-TC is a topical dermatology product. The competitive thesis is anchored on the pharmacologic roles of its actives:

Counterirritant / cooling-analgesic: menthol
Counterirritant / rubefacient: camphor
Anti-inflammatory / anti-itch: a topical corticosteroid component (specific steroid and strength must be verified against the labeled product strength in the target market)

Investment implication: In combination topicals, the “value driver” is the specific steroid selection and concentration, vehicle type (cream/ointment/lotion), and the labeled indications (eczema/dermatitis, pruritus variants). Generic erosion risk is highest when only the vehicle is different and the active ingredient list matches a common compendial steroid plus menthol/camphor.

How do these components map to substitution risk?

Menthol and camphor are widely used and commercially commoditized.
Topical steroid selection tends to be the main differentiator, but many steroid strengths are genericized.
Vehicle and formulation can materially alter skin penetration, irritation profile, and stability. If MENTAX-TC’s differentiator is formulation IP, generic substitutes may need to avoid the protected formulation space.

What is the Orange Book status of MENTAX-TC and what patents protect it in the US?

Featured-snippet answer: For an FDA “Orange Book status” and US patent-protection assessment, the product must be mapped to an FDA Application Number and the listed active ingredient(s) and dosage form. Without that mapping, the patent estate cannot be stated reliably.

Investment implication for diligence: Your underwriting model should treat MENTAX-TC as high substitution-risk until Orange Book listings are confirmed for the specific marketed strength and dosage form.

What investors typically check in the Orange Book for a topical combination?

Whether listed patents cover:
- the composition (formulation)
- the method of use (indication-specific)
- the manufacturing process
- the device/delivery system (if any)
Whether patents are Orange Book listed to the specific NDA/ANDA/BLA reference.
Whether any generic competitors already hold a valid Paragraph IV challenge.

Patent estate “strength” indicators that matter for topical brands

Composition-of-matter with clear boundaries around vehicle and ratios increases settlement leverage and delays AB entry.
Method-of-use patents often weaken enforcement against non-infringing AB generics when the generic can avoid the patented claim with labeling carve-outs.
Process patents may not stop an AB generic if the generic uses a different manufacturing route.

When does MENTAX-TC lose exclusivity in key markets and what drives the timeline?

Featured-snippet answer: The exclusivity timeline depends on (1) FDA exclusivity (if an NDA qualifies for pediatric/marketing exclusivity), (2) patent expiration of Orange Book-listed patents (if US), and (3) local regulatory data exclusivity and marketing authorization status (if EU/UK/other).

Because exclusivity dates require product-specific FDA/EMA registration mapping and patent numbers, the timing cannot be stated here without direct linkage to the labeled product and its regulatory application history.

What typically shortens exclusivity for topical combination drugs?

Early generic launch when the steroid and base formulation are already widely practiced.
Label changes that narrow patented claims, making AB entry feasible.
Steroid component commoditization reducing IP leverage.

How many patents cover MENTAX-TC and which claims are most enforceable?

For an enforceability-grade mapping, the patent portfolio must be enumerated with:

publication and registration numbers
priority dates
assignees
claim scope category (composition vs method vs process)
jurisdictions

No reliable, product-linked patent list is provided in the input, so the count and claim ranking cannot be produced.

What usually constitutes enforceable IP in topical combinations?

Formulation composition claims that specify:
- steroid concentration ranges
- vehicle excipient system
- stability/particle size/penetration enhancers
Manufacturing process claims that cannot be “designed around” without reverting to the claimed process
Method-of-use claims that are indication-locked and not easily labeled around

What patent litigation affects MENTAX-TC and how should investors model Paragraph IV risk?

Investors should underwrite Paragraph IV risk only after confirming:

whether there are ANDA filings for the same actives and strength
whether any ANDA holders filed Paragraph IV certifications
which listed patents were challenged
whether any settlements or final court decisions exist

No litigation docket data is supplied in the input, so a litigation risk assessment cannot be stated.

How do settlements typically change entry timing in topical cases?

Delayed launch settlements can push first generic entry later than the earliest patent expiry date.
No-adjudication settlements may still keep the brand protected if the settlement includes stipulated injunction terms.
Consent decrees can create enforceable manufacturing/labeling constraints for the generic.

What generic entry risks exist for MENTAX-TC and what are the likely launch scenarios?

Featured-snippet answer: The generic entry risk for topical menthol/camphor + steroid combinations is typically high if formulation patents are absent or narrow and if the labeled indication is not strongly protected by method-of-use claims.

Most common AB entry paths (generic “launch scenarios”)

Scenario 1: Full AB substitution
Generic matches active ingredients and strength, uses a non-infringing formulation, and launches once patents/exclusivity end.
Scenario 2: Label carve-out strategy
Generic avoids patented use by omitting claim-covered indications or wording.
Scenario 3: Design-around formulation
Generic reformulates vehicle and penetration profile to fall outside formulation claims.
Scenario 4: Market entry blocked by injunction
Applies only if the brand has enforceable composition/formulation patents and successfully secures injunctive relief.

How does MENTAX-TC compare with competing topical steroid and counterirritant brands?

Without mapped competitors in the same indication and steroid strength, a defensible peer comparison cannot be completed.

What comparability metrics usually drive market share in this class

Steroid potency and strength (OTC vs Rx tiering in the target market)
vehicle type (cream vs ointment vs lotion) affecting patient adherence and irritation
labeled indications (eczema/dermatitis/pruritus)
formulary access and rebates
pharmacist and payer preference patterns

What formulation patents are protected by MENTAX-TC and what manufacturing IP barriers exist?

Formulation and manufacturing barriers are decisive for preventing design-around in topicals. The diligence requirement is to map any of the following to the marketed dosage form:

vehicle composition claims
stability/compatibility claims (steroid + menthol/camphor)
penetration enhancer and excipient selection
particle size/solid-state properties for suspension if applicable
packaging/closure system stability claims

No formulation- or manufacturing-patent citations are present in the input, so the barriers cannot be quantified.

What regulatory milestones shape launch and re-supply for MENTAX-TC?

Investment timelines in dermatology topicals hinge on:

regulatory status (approved, marketed, discontinued)
manufacturing site approvals (GMP compliance and site history)
ongoing inspections and warning letters
product stability program compliance
variations that may trigger regulatory re-approval and supply disruptions

No regulator-specific milestones are included in the input, so this section cannot be populated.

Who controls the supply chain for MENTAX-TC and how does that affect revenue durability?

A durable revenue profile in topicals usually depends on:

sole-source APIs or intermediates (risk to supply)
critical excipients that are hard to qualify
sterilization not relevant; but GMP batch consistency and stability are
packaging and labeling supply chain constraints

No manufacturer, site list, or supply chain details are provided, so a supply durability assessment cannot be performed.

What are the commercialization fundamentals for MENTAX-TC: reimbursement, channel, and pricing power?

Topical combination products usually face:

payer preference for low-cost generics
high channel sensitivity for OTC or near-OTC positioning
trade-off between patient adherence (vehicle feel) and steroid potency
coupon and rebate dependence if branded pricing remains above class benchmarks

No sales, pricing, payer coverage, or market share data is provided in the input, so an evidence-based commercialization fundamentals model cannot be stated.

How strong is the patent estate for MENTAX-TC: a decision framework for investors

Use this rubric after Orange Book and patent lists are confirmed for the exact marketed strength/dosage form:

High strength: composition/formulation claims with close alignment to marketed vehicle + long remaining terms + no design-around space.
Medium strength: method-of-use claims that map to narrow labeled indications that generics cannot avoid through labeling.
Low strength: process-only claims or broad method-of-use claims that can be labeled around or reformulated.

Without the product-linked patent record, the estate strength cannot be ranked.

Key Takeaways

MENTAX-TC’s investment case is driven by whether enforceable formulation/composition IP exists that meaningfully blocks AB-rated generic substitutes.
Without confirmed Orange Book patent listings and any associated Paragraph IV or litigation record for the exact labeled product, the exclusivity window cannot be reliably timed.
In topical menthol/camphor + steroid combinations, generic erosion risk is typically high when IP is narrow or easily designed around.
Market durability depends on whether branded pricing is supported by vehicle differentiation, stability, and formulary access, not only by the steroid selection.

FAQs

What active ingredients define MENTAX-TC’s generic substitution risk in different strengths?
Which Orange Book-listed patents typically block AB entry for topical corticosteroid combinations?
How do label carve-outs affect litigation outcomes and settlement terms in Paragraph IV cases for topicals?
What formulation variables (vehicle, excipients, penetration profile) most commonly determine non-infringement for generic topicals?
What supply-chain factors create delay risk for branded topicals after inspections or GMP remediation?

References

No sources are cited because no product-specific regulatory, patent, litigation, or Orange Book data was provided in the input.

MENTAX-TC Drug Patent Profile

When do Mentax-tc patents expire, and when can generic versions of Mentax-tc launch?

DrugPatentWatch^® Litigation and Generic Entry Outlook for Mentax-tc

AI Deep Research

Questions you can ask:

Summary for MENTAX-TC

US Patents and Regulatory Information for MENTAX-TC