List of Excipients in Branded Drug QUETIAPINE FUMARATE ER

« Back to Dashboard

Generic Drugs Containing QUETIAPINE FUMARATE ER

Company	Ingredient	NDC	Excipient
Direct_Rx	quetiapine fumarate er	72189-481	HYPROMELLOSE 2208
Direct_Rx	quetiapine fumarate er	72189-481	HYPROMELLOSE 2910
Direct_Rx	quetiapine fumarate er	72189-481	LACTOSE MONOHYDRATE
Direct_Rx	quetiapine fumarate er	72189-481	MAGNESIUM STEARATE
Direct_Rx	quetiapine fumarate er	72189-481	POLYETHYLENE GLYCOL 400
Direct_Rx	quetiapine fumarate er	72189-481	POVIDONE K30
Direct_Rx	quetiapine fumarate er	72189-481	SODIUM CHLORIDE

What are the Most Frequently-Used Excipients in QUETIAPINE FUMARATE ER?

# Of NDCs	Excipient
3	CELLULOSE, MICROCRYSTALLINE
1	ETHYLCELLULOSE
2	FERRIC OXIDE YELLOW
2	HYPROMELLOSE
3	HYPROMELLOSE 2208
3	HYPROMELLOSE 2910
1	HYPROMELLOSES

Quetiapine Fumarate ER Excipient Strategy and Commercial Opportunities

Last updated: September 24, 2026

Quetiapine fumarate extended-release, marketed originally as Seroquel XR, is a mature oral controlled-release product with substantial generic competition and no biosimilar pathway. Its commercial opportunity is concentrated in excipient optimization, bioequivalent reformulation, contract manufacturing, differentiated dosage forms, and regional supply rather than in primary-molecule exclusivity.

The central formulation challenge is maintaining once-daily release across quetiapine’s broad dose range while controlling dose dumping, tablet size, mechanical strength, dissolution variability, and food effects. The most commercially relevant excipient platform is a hydrophilic matrix tablet using hypromellose, supported by diluents, binders, lubricants, and film-coating systems.

What is quetiapine fumarate ER and how is it regulated?

Quetiapine fumarate ER is an extended-release tablet containing quetiapine fumarate, an atypical antipsychotic. The product is administered once daily and has FDA-approved indications that include schizophrenia, acute manic episodes associated with bipolar disorder, depressive episodes associated with bipolar disorder, and adjunctive treatment of major depressive disorder in adults.[1]

The product is regulated as a small-molecule prescription drug under an abbreviated new drug application, or ANDA, pathway for generic manufacturers. It is not a biologic and does not create biosimilar exposure.

Key product characteristics

Attribute	Quetiapine fumarate ER
Active ingredient	Quetiapine fumarate
Dosage form	Extended-release film-coated tablet
Administration	Once daily
Reference product	Seroquel XR
Original sponsor	AstraZeneca
FDA pathway for generics	ANDA
Common strengths	50 mg, 150 mg, 200 mg, 300 mg, 400 mg
Release technology	Hydrophilic controlled-release matrix
Current exclusivity profile	Mature, post-exclusivity product
Biosimilar risk	Not applicable
Main technical barrier	In-vitro and in-vivo release equivalence across strengths

Seroquel XR was approved by the FDA in 2007.[2] The immediate-release version of quetiapine preceded the extended-release product and had a separate regulatory and patent history.

What excipients are used in quetiapine fumarate ER tablets?

The reference product uses a conventional solid oral controlled-release architecture. Public labeling identifies excipients including hypromellose, microcrystalline cellulose, lactose monohydrate, povidone, magnesium stearate, talc, and film-coating components such as polyethylene glycol, titanium dioxide, and iron oxides.[1,3]

Exact quantitative composition is generally not disclosed in public labeling. The commercial formulation strategy can be analyzed by excipient function.

Excipient class	Likely function	Commercial relevance
Hypromellose	Hydrophilic matrix former and release controller	Primary control of drug liberation
Microcrystalline cellulose	Diluent and compression aid	Tablet strength and manufacturability
Lactose monohydrate	Filler and bulking agent	Cost-effective dose normalization
Povidone	Binder and granulation aid	Content uniformity and mechanical integrity
Magnesium stearate	Lubricant	Ejection force and tooling protection
Talc	Processing or coating aid	Flow and antiadherence properties
Polyethylene glycol	Film-coating plasticizer	Coating flexibility
Titanium dioxide	Opacifier and colorant	Appearance and light protection
Iron oxides	Strength-specific colorant	Product identification and differentiation

Why hypromellose is commercially important

Hypromellose, also known as hydroxypropyl methylcellulose or HPMC, is the principal excipient opportunity in the formulation. It hydrates after ingestion, forms a gel layer, and regulates diffusion and erosion of the matrix. Its viscosity grade, particle size, substitution profile, concentration, and distribution within the granulation can change the dissolution profile.

For quetiapine fumarate ER, HPMC selection affects:

• Initial release during the first several hours.
• Total release duration.
• Sensitivity to agitation and hydrodynamic conditions.
• Dose proportionality between tablet strengths.
• Tablet hardness and friability.
• Food-effect behavior.
• Risk of alcohol-induced dose dumping.
• Manufacturing robustness at commercial scale.

A manufacturer seeking a substitutable formulation must balance release control against tablet dimensions. Excessive HPMC can produce large tablets, slow release excessively, or create compression and granulation problems. Insufficient HPMC can produce a rapid early release and increase the risk of dissolution failure.

What formulation strategies are available for quetiapine fumarate ER?

The reference product is associated with a matrix-tablet approach, but generic and follow-on developers can pursue several formulation strategies.

Hydrophilic matrix tablets

A hydrophilic matrix is the most direct platform. Quetiapine fumarate is dispersed with HPMC and other excipients, followed by blending, granulation or direct compression, tablet compression, and film coating.

Commercial advantages include:

• Established regulatory precedent.
• Broad excipient availability.
• Low manufacturing complexity compared with multiparticulate systems.
• Compatibility with high-volume tablet production.
• Straightforward strength scaling.

The main disadvantages are sensitivity to process variables and the need to reproduce the reference dissolution behavior across multiple media and apparatus conditions.

Polymer combinations

HPMC can be combined with other release-controlling polymers, including polyethylene oxide, carbomers, sodium carboxymethylcellulose, or selected methacrylate polymers. These combinations may improve release control or reduce polymer loading.

The regulatory risk is higher when the polymer system differs materially from the reference product. A novel excipient combination can create a more difficult bioequivalence package, particularly where the dissolution profile is sensitive to pH, ionic strength, agitation, or fed conditions.

Multiparticulate systems

Pellets, coated granules, or mini-tablets can distribute the drug across multiple controlled-release units. This approach can reduce variability caused by single-tablet matrix failure and can offer flexible dose assembly.

The disadvantages include more processing steps, higher coating costs, greater equipment requirements, and more complex control of coating weight gain. Multiparticulates may have value in future pediatric, sprinkle, or dysphagia-friendly presentations, but these applications would require a new product strategy rather than a simple generic substitution.

Osmotic or membrane-controlled systems

An osmotic system could provide tighter release control, but its manufacturing and intellectual-property profile is more complex. It would also require a stronger commercial justification because the reference product is already a widely available extended-release tablet.

Abuse-deterrent or tamper-resistant approaches

Quetiapine has been associated with off-label misuse and abuse concerns in certain populations. A tamper-resistant formulation could create differentiation, but the development burden would be high and the commercial value would depend on payer recognition, clinical evidence, and regulatory acceptance.

How does the excipient strategy affect generic bioequivalence?

Generic developers must demonstrate pharmaceutical equivalence and bioequivalence to the reference listed drug. For extended-release products, dissolution testing is central but may not be sufficient by itself. The sponsor generally must address pharmacokinetic performance under fasting and fed conditions and may need multiple-dose or additional studies depending on FDA requirements.[4]

Critical formulation variables include:

1. HPMC grade and concentration.
2. Drug-to-polymer ratio.
3. Granulation endpoint and moisture level.
4. Lubrication time and magnesium stearate concentration.
5. Tablet hardness and porosity.
6. Film-coating weight gain.
7. API particle-size distribution.
8. Manufacturing scale and mixing order.

The active pharmaceutical ingredient has a high dose burden in the larger strengths. That limits the amount of release-controlling polymer and excipient that can be added without increasing tablet size. It also makes blend uniformity and compression behavior commercially important.

Dissolution is the main excipient-driven risk

A formulation can meet a single dissolution specification and still diverge from the reference product under other conditions. Developers therefore examine:

• Multiple pH media.
• Different agitation speeds.
• Alcohol challenge conditions.
• Fed and fasted conditions.
• Strength-to-strength release similarity.
• Stability-aged dissolution.
• Scale-up batches.

A generic manufacturer that uses a different HPMC viscosity grade may achieve an acceptable initial profile but fail at later time points. Conversely, a slower matrix may produce a suitable dissolution profile while producing an unacceptable pharmacokinetic tail.

What patents protect quetiapine fumarate ER?

Quetiapine’s original compound and extended-release intellectual property were historically associated with AstraZeneca. The principal compound patent family expired before the current market period, and the product now has extensive generic competition.

The commercially relevant patent categories were:

Patent category	Historical role	Current commercial impact
Quetiapine compound patents	Protected the active molecule	Expired
Extended-release formulation patents	Covered controlled-release dosage forms or release profiles	Largely expired or no longer a practical barrier to routine generic entry
Method-of-use patents	Covered psychiatric indications and dosing regimes	Limited impact after generic entry
Manufacturing patents	Could cover process or solid-state aspects	Relevant only if unexpired and enforceable
Pediatric or regulatory exclusivity	Delayed or limited generic labeling in defined periods	Expired for the mature product

The Orange Book remains the authoritative source for listed patents and exclusivity associated with FDA-approved reference products.[5] Because Orange Book listings and patent statuses can change, current legal conclusions should be based on the active FDA listing and relevant court docket rather than historical patent summaries.

When did quetiapine fumarate ER lose exclusivity?

Seroquel XR is a post-exclusivity product. FDA-approved generic quetiapine fumarate ER products entered the U.S. market after the relevant reference-product exclusivity and patent barriers expired or were resolved.

The timing was commercially important because extended-release quetiapine had a later entry window than immediate-release quetiapine. Once multiple ANDA products reached the market, price competition increased and the value of the original branded formulation declined.

There is no current biologic exclusivity period comparable to the 12-year reference-product period under the Public Health Service Act. Quetiapine is a conventional small molecule and follows the Hatch-Waxman framework.

Were there Paragraph IV challenges to Seroquel XR?

Yes. Seroquel XR was subject to the standard generic challenge environment under Hatch-Waxman, including patent certifications and litigation associated with ANDA filings. Paragraph IV litigation risk centered on whether generic extended-release products infringed listed formulation patents and whether those patents were valid and enforceable.

For commercial purposes, the important point is that the Paragraph IV risk has already been converted into market-entry precedent. A new generic entrant today generally faces less uncertainty than the first wave of challengers, but it still must evaluate:

• Current Orange Book listings.
• Any unexpired formulation or process patents.
• 30-month-stay history where relevant.
• Settlement restrictions.
• Authorized-generic activity.
• State and federal antitrust exposure.
• Product-specific FDA bioequivalence requirements.

Historical patent litigation does not establish that every formulation is legally interchangeable. A materially different matrix, coating, or manufacturing process may create a separate freedom-to-operate analysis.

What is the FDA and Orange Book status of quetiapine fumarate ER?

The FDA-approved reference product is Seroquel XR. Generic quetiapine fumarate ER tablets are approved through ANDAs and are generally therapeutically equivalent to the reference product when assigned an appropriate Orange Book rating.

The Orange Book identifies the reference listed drug, approved strengths, therapeutic-equivalence codes, and listed patent or exclusivity information. FDA labeling also identifies the reference product’s inactive ingredients and administration restrictions, including the requirement that extended-release tablets be swallowed whole rather than crushed, chewed, or split.[1,5]

For a commercial entrant, the relevant regulatory questions are:

• Whether all target strengths are approved.
• Whether the product has an AB rating.
• Whether the formulation is eligible for automatic substitution under state law.
• Whether the sponsor can maintain consistent dissolution after scale-up.
• Whether the product label matches the reference product sufficiently for pharmacy substitution.
• Whether a shortage or discontinuation creates a near-term supply opening.

Which commercial opportunities exist in quetiapine fumarate ER?

Generic finished-dose products

The largest opportunity is a reliable, low-cost generic tablet platform. Market entry is more attractive where the manufacturer has:

• Existing HPMC matrix-tablet capability.
• Access to qualified quetiapine fumarate API.
• Multi-strength compression capacity.
• Established dissolution and bioequivalence expertise.
• U.S. regulatory infrastructure.
• Manufacturing redundancy.

A four- or five-strength portfolio is generally more competitive than a single-strength launch because wholesalers, hospitals, and pharmacy chains prefer broad catalog coverage.

Excipient supply and formulation services

Excipient suppliers can compete through:

• Direct-compression HPMC grades.
• Controlled-particle-size polymers.
• Co-processed excipients.
• Low-moisture diluent systems.
• Improved magnesium stearate alternatives.
• Film-coating systems with strength-specific color matching.
• Technical support for dissolution modeling and scale-up.

A supplier that can demonstrate lower batch-to-batch dissolution variability may command more value than one competing only on unit price.

Contract development and manufacturing

CDMOs with high-potency oral solid-dose infrastructure can offer development packages covering:

• API characterization.
• Design of experiments for HPMC concentration.
• Comparative dissolution.
• Pilot and pivotal bioequivalence batches.
• Stability studies.
• Commercial-scale transfer.
• ANDA manufacturing.

Quetiapine is not generally handled as a high-potency oncology compound, but containment, occupational exposure controls, cleaning validation, and cross-contamination management remain relevant.

Regional and shortage-driven supply

Regional manufacturers may find opportunities in markets where branded Seroquel XR or local generics have limited availability. The opportunity is strongest where:

• The product is reimbursed.
• Extended-release alternatives are scarce.
• Hospital procurement favors reliable supply.
• Local registration does not require a full U.S.-style patent challenge.
• API sourcing is diversified.

Differentiated delivery systems

Potentially differentiated products include:

• Smaller tablets.
• Sprinkle formulations.
• Multiparticulates for swallowing difficulties.
• Pediatric-compatible dosage forms.
• Lower-cost packaging with improved moisture protection.
• Products with a more consistent food-effect profile.

These products would face greater regulatory and clinical development requirements than a conventional ANDA tablet. They may be more commercially defensible but would not automatically receive the substitution benefits of a standard AB-rated generic.

How does quetiapine fumarate ER compare with other extended-release antipsychotics?

Product class	Formulation opportunity	Generic barrier	Commercial profile
Quetiapine fumarate ER	Matrix tablet, multiparticulate, alternative polymers	Moderate bioequivalence and dissolution burden	Mature, price-sensitive
Paliperidone ER	Osmotic delivery system	Higher technology and formulation complexity	Stronger delivery-system differentiation
Aripiprazole ER oral products	Conventional modified-release opportunities are limited	Active-molecule and product-specific constraints	Different dosing and indication profile
Risperidone ER injectable	Long-acting depot technology	Device, microsphere, and clinical barriers	Higher technical barrier
Olanzapine oral products	Immediate-release and orally disintegrating platforms	Lower ER-specific complexity	Competitive generic market

Quetiapine fumarate ER is easier to manufacture than long-acting injectable antipsychotics but more demanding than an immediate-release tablet. Its commercial value depends on execution, not on a proprietary delivery platform.

How strong is the quetiapine fumarate ER patent estate?

The original patent estate is weak as a barrier to conventional generic entry because the product is mature and widely genericized. The remaining defensible areas are more likely to involve:

• Narrow formulation claims.
• Specific polymer ratios.
• Manufacturing processes.
• Particle engineering.
• Novel dosage forms.
• Patient-population or dosing claims.
• Proprietary combinations.

A new patent position based only on substituting one conventional pharmaceutical excipient for another would face validity and obviousness risk. Stronger protection would require a measurable technical effect, such as a distinct release profile, improved food-effect performance, reduced variability, or a clinically relevant adherence benefit.

What generic launch risks exist?

The main launch risks are technical and commercial rather than molecule-patent driven.

Technical risks

• Failure to match the reference dissolution profile.
• Unexpected food-effect differences.
• Dose dumping under alcohol conditions.
• Strength-specific bioequivalence failure.
• Stability-related release drift.
• API particle-size variation.
• Tablet-size constraints at 300 mg and 400 mg strengths.

Commercial risks

• Rapid price erosion after multi-source entry.
• Low reimbursement margins.
• Wholesaler concentration.
• Inventory write-offs during price declines.
• Limited differentiation among AB-rated products.
• Dependence on a single API supplier.
• Competitive launches by larger generic manufacturers.

Manufacturing and IP barriers

The most important manufacturing barrier is process consistency. A formulation that works at laboratory scale may fail during high-shear granulation, commercial blending, or compression because polymer distribution and tablet porosity change with scale.

The most important IP barrier is claim scope. A generic manufacturer must avoid unexpired claims covering a particular release profile, polymer combination, manufacturing method, or dosage form.

What licensing deals affect quetiapine fumarate ER?

No major current excipient-specific licensing transaction is associated with quetiapine fumarate ER in the public domain. The relevant commercial relationships are more likely to involve:

• API supply agreements.
• Generic commercialization partnerships.
• Regional distribution licenses.
• CDMO manufacturing contracts.
• Excipient supply and technical-support agreements.

A licensing strategy would have greater value if it paired a differentiated delivery system with a regulatory pathway or market-access advantage. A conventional HPMC matrix formulation is unlikely to justify a substantial royalty burden because multiple substitute excipient systems are available.

Key Takeaways

• Quetiapine fumarate ER is a mature small-molecule product with extensive generic competition.
• The commercial formulation is centered on a hydrophilic HPMC matrix tablet.
• Excipient selection directly affects dissolution, food effect, dose dumping, tablet size, and bioequivalence.
• HPMC grade, polymer loading, granulation, lubrication, and tablet porosity are the highest-value development variables.
• Biosimilar risk does not apply because quetiapine is a conventional small molecule.
• The original compound and major product exclusivity barriers have expired or ceased to block routine generic entry.
• The strongest opportunities are generic multi-strength portfolios, excipient supply, CDMO development, regional supply, and differentiated swallowing-friendly products.
• Patent value is limited for conventional formulations and stronger for technically distinct release systems with measurable performance advantages.
• Commercial success depends on reliable scale-up, broad strength coverage, API security, and cost control.

FAQs About Quetiapine Fumarate ER Excipient and Commercial Strategy

Can quetiapine fumarate ER be formulated without hypromellose?

Yes. Alternative polymers or multiparticulate systems can control release, but the formulation would require comparative dissolution development and bioequivalence support. Removing HPMC does not eliminate the need to reproduce the reference product’s pharmacokinetic profile.

Is lactose compatible with quetiapine fumarate ER?

Lactose is used as a filler in the reference formulation and can support dose normalization and tablet manufacturability. Compatibility must still be confirmed through impurity, moisture, stability, and process studies.

Can quetiapine fumarate ER tablets be scored?

A modified-release tablet should not be scored or divided unless the approved labeling specifically permits it. Crushing, chewing, or splitting can alter release and increase exposure risk.[1]

Is quetiapine fumarate ER a high-potency manufacturing product?

It requires controlled pharmaceutical manufacturing and cleaning validation, but its containment requirements differ from those of highly potent cytotoxic or hormonal products. The applicable controls depend on occupational exposure assessments and facility standards.

Can an excipient supplier patent a new quetiapine ER formulation?

Potentially, but patent strength would depend on novelty, nonobviousness, enablement, and measurable technical effects. A routine substitution of one standard matrix polymer for another would generally provide a weaker patent position than a formulation with demonstrated release, stability, or pharmacokinetic advantages.

References

1. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2024). Seroquel XR (quetiapine fumarate) extended-release tablets prescribing information.
2. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2007). FDA approves Seroquel XR for schizophrenia.
3. DailyMed. (2024). Seroquel XR: Quetiapine fumarate extended-release tablets. National Library of Medicine.
4. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2003). Guidance for industry: Bioavailability and bioequivalence studies for orally administered drug products.
5. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2024). Approved drug products with therapeutic equivalence evaluations, commonly known as the Orange Book.