Share This Page
List of Excipients in Branded Drug PERAMPANEL
✉ Email this page to a colleague
Generic Drugs Containing PERAMPANEL
| Company | Ingredient | NDC | Excipient |
|---|---|---|---|
| Teva Pharmaceuticals Inc | perampanel | 0480-7062 | CELLULOSE, MICROCRYSTALLINE |
| Teva Pharmaceuticals Inc | perampanel | 0480-7062 | CROSPOVIDONE |
| Teva Pharmaceuticals Inc | perampanel | 0480-7062 | FERRIC OXIDE RED |
| Teva Pharmaceuticals Inc | perampanel | 0480-7062 | FERRIC OXIDE YELLOW |
| >Company | >Ingredient | >NDC | >Excipient |
What are the Most Frequently-Used Excipients in PERAMPANEL?
| # Of NDCs | Excipient |
|---|---|
| 2 | ANHYDROUS CITRIC ACID |
| 2 | CARBOXYMETHYLCELLULOSE SODIUM |
| 4 | CELLULOSE, MICROCRYSTALLINE |
| 1 | CROSPOVIDONE |
| ># Of NDCs | >Excipient |
Perampanel Excipient Strategy and Commercial Opportunities
Perampanel is a commercially established antiseizure medicine marketed by Eisai as Fycompa. Its main excipient opportunities are pediatric and geriatric administration, taste-masked liquids, orally disintegrating or sprinkle formulations, improved dissolution, and lower-cost generic manufacturing. The marketed dosage forms use a conventional immediate-release tablet platform and a 0.5 mg/mL oral suspension, leaving room for differentiated delivery systems if they can demonstrate bioequivalence, dose uniformity, stability, and acceptable tolerability.
What is perampanel and how is it commercialized?
Perampanel is a selective, noncompetitive antagonist of AMPA-type glutamate receptors. Fycompa is approved in the United States for partial-onset seizures in patients aged 4 years and older and for primary generalized tonic-clonic seizures in patients aged 12 years and older, as adjunctive therapy.[1]
| Attribute | Perampanel commercial profile |
|---|---|
| Active ingredient | Perampanel |
| Brand | Fycompa |
| Originator | Eisai Co., Ltd. |
| Drug class | Antiseizure medicine; AMPA receptor antagonist |
| U.S. NDA | 202834 |
| Dosage forms | Immediate-release film-coated tablets; oral suspension |
| Tablet strengths | 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 mg |
| Oral suspension | 0.5 mg/mL |
| Controlled-substance status | Schedule III in the United States |
| Administration | Once daily, generally at bedtime |
| Primary commercial markets | Epilepsy, chronic maintenance therapy, pediatric and adult neurology |
Perampanel’s once-daily dosing supports adherence, while its long half-life and central nervous system activity impose a narrow tolerability and titration profile. Excipients that accelerate absorption or increase peak exposure would require particular scrutiny because dizziness, somnolence, irritability, aggression, and other neuropsychiatric events are clinically relevant label risks.[1]
What excipients are used in Fycompa tablets and oral suspension?
The U.S. prescribing information identifies different excipient systems for the tablet and liquid products. Formulations can differ by jurisdiction and manufacturing site, so regulatory submissions must be tied to the applicable product label and chemistry, manufacturing, and controls documentation.
Fycompa film-coated tablets
The tablet core uses a conventional direct-compression or wet-granulation excipient architecture. Listed inactive ingredients include lactose monohydrate, low-substituted hydroxypropyl cellulose, povidone, crospovidone, and magnesium stearate. The film coating contains hypromellose, talc, titanium dioxide, and strength-dependent colorants.[1]
The functional roles are straightforward:
| Excipient or class | Likely formulation function |
|---|---|
| Lactose monohydrate | Diluent and tablet-mass builder |
| Low-substituted hydroxypropyl cellulose | Binder and disintegration aid |
| Povidone | Binder |
| Crospovidone | Superdisintegrant |
| Magnesium stearate | Lubricant |
| Hypromellose | Film former |
| Talc | Anti-tacking and coating aid |
| Titanium dioxide and colorants | Opacity and product identification |
The tablet strategy is optimized for dose flexibility across six strengths rather than for modified release or advanced solubilization. A generic manufacturer can likely compete through conventional immediate-release processing, but must control blend uniformity, tablet hardness, disintegration, dissolution, coating appearance, and impurity formation.
Fycompa oral suspension
The marketed oral suspension is supplied at 0.5 mg/mL. The liquid dosage form is commercially important because it enables administration to children and patients who cannot swallow tablets. The formulation uses a suspension vehicle with viscosity control, sweetening, buffering or pH adjustment, preservation, and flavoring functions.[1]
The key technical issue is not simply keeping perampanel suspended. The product must deliver a consistent dose after storage, shaking, withdrawal through the supplied oral syringe, and repeated opening. Critical attributes include:
- sedimentation rate and redispersibility;
- particle-size distribution;
- delivered volume and syringe compatibility;
- preservative effectiveness;
- microbial limits;
- viscosity across storage temperatures;
- flavor and mouthfeel;
- dose recovery after partial bottle use;
- chemical stability in the presence of flavor and preservative systems.
For a generic or differentiated liquid, the excipient system is a major development variable. A suspension that is physically stable but difficult to redisperse can create dose variability and regulatory risk.
What excipient strategies offer the strongest commercial opportunity?
The strongest opportunities are dosage-form improvements that solve a defined administration problem without materially changing perampanel exposure.
1. Pediatric taste-masked suspension
Pediatric epilepsy is the clearest excipient-driven opportunity. Perampanel has a low daily dose relative to many liquid medicines, which allows a concentrated formulation such as 0.5 mg/mL. A competing product could target:
- improved cherry or fruit flavor;
- reduced bitterness and aftertaste;
- lower viscosity for easier syringe withdrawal;
- reduced sedimentation;
- a preservative system with better global acceptability;
- a smaller bottle and lower fill volume;
- compatibility with enteral feeding tubes.
Taste masking can use polymeric coating, ion-exchange resins, cyclodextrin complexes, lipid-based barriers, or flavor-sweetener systems. Ion exchange is less attractive unless perampanel’s physicochemical properties support stable complexation without delaying release. A simple flavor system is easier to scale but may be insufficient if bitterness persists at the dose volume.
2. Alcohol-free and excipient-minimized liquid
A liquid product with a short, globally acceptable excipient list could compete in pediatric hospitals, specialty pharmacies, and markets with restrictions on ethanol or certain preservatives. The commercial value would depend on demonstrating equivalent dose delivery and acceptable stability without relying on formulation components that create regional labeling or procurement barriers.
An alcohol-free product is not automatically differentiated under U.S. generic rules. It becomes commercially meaningful when it improves pediatric acceptability, supports feeding-tube administration, or reduces supply-chain complexity across jurisdictions.
3. Orally disintegrating tablet
An orally disintegrating tablet could address patients with dysphagia, developmental disabilities, or acute administration difficulties. The main technical constraints are:
- maintaining dose uniformity at low strengths;
- avoiding excessive friability;
- achieving rapid disintegration without a gritty mouthfeel;
- masking perampanel’s taste;
- preserving stability under humidity exposure;
- demonstrating comparable exposure to the reference product.
Potential excipients include mannitol, crospovidone, co-processed excipients, porous carriers, flavor systems, and taste-masking polymers. Mannitol may improve mouthfeel, but its hygroscopicity and compression behavior require control. A rapidly disintegrating formulation can create a useful product profile without necessarily changing the pharmacokinetic target.
4. Sprinkle or capsule-opening formulation
A multiparticulate product could permit administration over soft food, yogurt, or enteral nutrition. It would need protection against premature release, segregation, and dose loss on the food vehicle. The formulation must establish:
- uniform recovery from the capsule or sachet;
- no unacceptable interaction with food;
- no clinically meaningful change in exposure;
- chemical and physical stability after opening;
- validated instructions for administration.
This opportunity is commercially attractive for caregivers, but the development burden is higher than for a conventional tablet because the product must control particle distribution and food-contact performance.
5. Dissolution-enhanced immediate-release tablet
Perampanel is a low-dose active ingredient with limited aqueous solubility. A formulation using a surfactant, wetting agent, micronized API, co-precipitate, or amorphous solid dispersion could improve dissolution. The commercial case is strongest if dissolution is variable under relevant gastrointestinal conditions or if a new dosage form must achieve reliable exposure.
Potential approaches include:
- particle-size reduction;
- surfactant-assisted wetting;
- polymer-based amorphous dispersion;
- cyclodextrin complexation;
- lipid or self-emulsifying systems;
- porous carrier systems.
The risk is that improved dissolution can increase peak concentration or alter food effects. Because perampanel has central nervous system adverse effects and a long half-life, a formulation that changes exposure may require more than a conventional bioequivalence package.
How does perampanel’s excipient strategy compare with competing antiseizure drugs?
Perampanel is less differentiated by excipient technology than several competing antiseizure products. Levetiracetam has widely available oral solutions, tablets, and intravenous products. Lamotrigine has chewable and dispersible products. Valproate has liquids, delayed-release tablets, extended-release tablets, and sprinkle capsules. Lacosamide has tablets, oral solution, and intravenous formulations.
| Drug | Common differentiated dosage forms | Commercial implication for perampanel |
|---|---|---|
| Levetiracetam | Tablet, oral solution, injection | Strong generic competition across administration routes |
| Lamotrigine | Immediate-release, extended-release, chewable/dispersible | Sets a higher standard for flexible pediatric administration |
| Valproate | Syrup, solution, delayed-release, extended-release, sprinkle | Broad formulation benchmark, but more complex safety profile |
| Lacosamide | Tablet, oral solution, injection | Competes in focal epilepsy with liquid and hospital-use options |
| Perampanel | Film-coated tablet, oral suspension | Opportunity remains in ODT, sprinkle, tube-compatible, and improved taste-masked products |
Perampanel’s once-daily schedule is a commercial advantage, but its psychiatric and behavioral warnings make dose control and patient acceptability important. Excipients should support administration without creating rapid-release behavior or excessive peak exposure.
What regulatory pathway applies to generic perampanel formulations?
A conventional generic tablet can generally pursue an abbreviated new drug application if it matches the reference product in active ingredient, dosage form, strength, route, and other required characteristics. The applicant must demonstrate pharmaceutical equivalence and bioequivalence and address the applicable U.S. patent certifications listed in the Orange Book.[2]
A materially different formulation may require a different pathway:
| Product concept | Likely U.S. pathway |
|---|---|
| Conventional immediate-release tablet | ANDA, subject to equivalence and patent requirements |
| Same-strength oral suspension with different excipients | Usually ANDA if pharmaceutical equivalence and bioequivalence are established |
| Orally disintegrating tablet | ANDA only if it fits applicable product-equivalence requirements; otherwise potential 505(b)(2) |
| Sprinkle multiparticulate product | Potential ANDA or 505(b)(2), depending on reference-product equivalence |
| Modified-release formulation | Often 505(b)(2) or a new drug application strategy |
| New route or clinically distinct delivery system | 505(b)(2) or full NDA pathway |
A 505(b)(2) strategy can create a differentiated product with new labeling or administration claims, but it may also trigger additional clinical, pharmacokinetic, food-effect, stability, and human-factors studies.
What is the Orange Book and patent status of Fycompa?
Fycompa is listed in the FDA Orange Book under NDA 202834. Orange Book analysis should distinguish the active-ingredient patent, formulation or method-of-use patents, pediatric exclusivity, and any unexpired regulatory exclusivity.[2]
The original perampanel compound patent is associated with Eisai and has been central to the product’s U.S. exclusivity history. Patent term, patent-term adjustment, pediatric exclusivity, and listed patent status must be checked against the current Orange Book entry and FDA approval history before a launch date is modeled. A Paragraph IV filing can create litigation exposure and a 30-month stay under the Hatch-Waxman framework if the relevant conditions are met.
For an excipient-driven product, the principal patent risks are usually not the excipient names themselves. Risk is more likely to arise from claims covering:
- a specific liquid formulation;
- particle-size limits;
- taste-masking architecture;
- suspension stability;
- a dosage regimen;
- a particular patient population;
- administration with food or through a feeding tube;
- manufacturing controls that define the final product.
A new formulation should therefore be screened against both composition claims and functional claims. A formulation that avoids the listed excipient may still infringe a claim defined by concentration, particle size, pH, viscosity, dissolution, or stability performance.
Which companies are challenging perampanel exclusivity?
Generic competition is expected to focus first on conventional tablets because they have the lowest development and manufacturing complexity. Potential participants include established generic companies with CNS portfolios and contract development and manufacturing organizations that can produce low-dose, high-potency solid oral products.
The most commercially relevant competitive categories are:
- conventional tablets in all approved strengths;
- oral suspension suppliers;
- low-cost international manufacturers;
- differentiated pediatric products;
- specialty-pharmacy suppliers with packaging or adherence services.
A Paragraph IV challenge can accelerate market entry but exposes the filer to patent litigation and possible damages. An authorized generic or settlement agreement could alter the entry timetable, price erosion, and channel access. Public analysis should rely on FDA approval records, Orange Book certifications, PACER litigation records, and company disclosures rather than on promotional statements.
What manufacturing and intellectual-property barriers affect excipient commercialization?
Perampanel is potent at low dose, making content uniformity and segregation major manufacturing concerns. The most important process controls are:
- API particle-size distribution;
- geometric dilution and blend sampling;
- lubricant mixing time;
- tablet compression force;
- coating weight gain;
- suspension particle-size control;
- bottle and syringe dose delivery;
- preservative distribution;
- cleaning validation for potent CNS compounds.
For liquid products, container-closure selection is commercially important. A bottle that adsorbs perampanel, leaches extractables, or causes poor syringe withdrawal can undermine an otherwise acceptable formulation. For pediatric use, child-resistant packaging and accurate dosing devices are part of the product proposition.
Excipient supply is another potential barrier. Crospovidone, low-substituted hydroxypropyl cellulose, specialty coating materials, flavors, and suspension stabilizers can face supplier qualification or regional availability constraints. A dual-source strategy is valuable for a generic launch, especially where the formulation depends on a narrow viscosity grade or proprietary flavor.
How strong is the perampanel formulation opportunity?
The formulation opportunity is moderate rather than transformational.
| Opportunity | Technical difficulty | Commercial attractiveness | IP potential |
|---|---|---|---|
| Conventional generic tablet | Low to moderate | High volume, price-driven | Low unless process or formulation claims apply |
| Improved oral suspension | Moderate | High in pediatrics and dysphagia | Moderate |
| Taste-masked liquid | Moderate to high | High if tolerability improves | Moderate to high |
| Orally disintegrating tablet | High | Moderate to high | Moderate |
| Sprinkle or tube-compatible product | High | Targeted but defensible | High |
| Amorphous or lipid-based formulation | High | Unclear unless exposure improves | High |
| Modified-release product | Very high | Potentially meaningful, but clinically complex | High |
The best near-term commercial strategy is a differentiated oral suspension or ODT with a clear administration benefit. A new formulation should preserve once-daily dosing, avoid increased peak exposure, and support pediatric labeling. A conventional tablet is more suitable for a cost-leadership strategy than for premium pricing.
What revenue exposure and launch scenarios exist for perampanel?
Perampanel revenue is exposed to generic entry across six tablet strengths and the oral suspension. Tablets will likely experience faster price erosion because multiple manufacturers can use established immediate-release platforms. The oral suspension may retain a narrower specialty market if it requires more complex stability, taste, packaging, and device work.
| Launch scenario | Expected market effect |
|---|---|
| Single generic tablet entrant | Moderate price reduction; brand may retain specialty share |
| Multiple tablet entrants | Rapid price erosion and channel substitution |
| Generic suspension entrant | Additional pediatric and caregiver pressure |
| Authorized generic | Earlier price competition with controlled supply |
| ODT or sprinkle entrant | Targeted share capture rather than full substitution |
| Taste-masked pediatric product | Potential premium in specialty and hospital channels |
Commercial success will depend on more than formulation novelty. Reimbursement placement, wholesaler access, controlled-substance distribution requirements, pediatric labeling, and reliable supply will determine whether a differentiated excipient product earns a premium.
Key Takeaways
- Perampanel’s marketed formulation is a conventional immediate-release tablet plus a 0.5 mg/mL oral suspension.
- The highest-value excipient opportunities are taste masking, ODT delivery, sprinkle administration, enteral-tube compatibility, and suspension stability.
- Conventional tablets are likely to face the most intense generic price competition.
- A differentiated liquid can defend value if it improves pediatric acceptability, dose accuracy, or administration.
- Formulation development must control peak exposure because perampanel has clinically important CNS and behavioral adverse effects.
- Patent analysis should cover composition, concentration, particle size, dissolution, stability, administration, method-of-use, and manufacturing claims.
- A 505(b)(2) pathway may be appropriate for materially differentiated dosage forms, while conventional tablets and equivalent suspensions generally fit the ANDA framework.
FAQs
Can perampanel be reformulated as an orally disintegrating tablet?
Yes. The formulation would need to demonstrate acceptable taste, rapid disintegration, dose uniformity, stability, and bioequivalence or otherwise support a 505(b)(2) application.
Which excipient is most important in a perampanel suspension?
The suspension-stabilizing system is central because it controls sedimentation, redispersibility, syringe delivery, and dose uniformity. Flavor, preservative, and viscosity systems are also commercially important.
Is a lactose-free perampanel tablet commercially attractive?
Potentially, but the opportunity is limited unless lactose intolerance, allergy concerns, or regional procurement requirements create measurable demand. A lactose-free formulation must preserve compression, disintegration, stability, and bioequivalence.
Could a perampanel liquid be administered through a feeding tube?
It may be possible, but tube compatibility must be demonstrated. Studies should assess dose recovery, adsorption, clogging, dilution, flushing, and stability after contact with the device and administration vehicle.
What is the best patent strategy for a new perampanel excipient formulation?
The strongest strategy combines composition claims with measurable performance limits, such as particle size, viscosity, dissolution, redispersibility, taste-masking structure, stability, or dose-delivery accuracy. Claims limited only to routine excipient substitution are more vulnerable to obviousness challenges.
References
-
Eisai Inc. (2023). Fycompa (perampanel) tablets and oral suspension: U.S. prescribing information. U.S. Food and Drug Administration labeling database.
-
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2024). Approved drug products with therapeutic equivalence evaluations: Orange Book. FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.
-
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2024). Drugs@FDA: Fycompa, NDA 202834. FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.
-
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2024). Guidance for industry: Bioequivalence studies with pharmacokinetic endpoints for drugs submitted under an ANDA. FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.
More… ↓
Make Better Decisions: Try a trial or see plans & pricing
Drugs may be covered by multiple patents or regulatory protections. All trademarks and applicant names are the property of their respective owners or licensors. Although great care is taken in the proper and correct provision of this service, thinkBiotech LLC does not accept any responsibility for possible consequences of errors or omissions in the provided data. The data presented herein is for information purposes only. There is no warranty that the data contained herein is error free. We do not provide individual investment advice. This service is not registered with any financial regulatory agency. The information we publish is educational only and based on our opinions plus our models. By using DrugPatentWatch you acknowledge that we do not provide personalized recommendations or advice. thinkBiotech performs no independent verification of facts as provided by public sources nor are attempts made to provide legal or investing advice. Any reliance on data provided herein is done solely at the discretion of the user. Users of this service are advised to seek professional advice and independent confirmation before considering acting on any of the provided information. thinkBiotech LLC reserves the right to amend, extend or withdraw any part or all of the offered service without notice.
Alerts Available With Subscription
Alerts are available for users with active subscriptions.
Visit the Subscription Options page for details on plans and pricing.
ISSN: 2162-2639

Privacy and Cookies
Terms & Conditions
Site Map
DrugPatentWatch Alternatives
LOE / Major Patent Expirations 2026 - 2027
NCE-1 Patent Challenge Dates 2026 - 2027
Friedman, Yali. "DrugPatentWatch" DrugPatentWatch, thinkBiotech, 2026, www.DrugPatentWatch.com.
See Primary Research Papers Citing DrugPatentWatch
Access the Complete Database
BioPharmaceutical Business Intelligence
- Analyze global market entry opportunities
- Identify first generic entrants
- Drug patents in 130+ countries