List of Excipients in Branded Drug IRON SUCROSE

« Back to Dashboard

Generic Drugs Containing IRON SUCROSE

Company	Ingredient	NDC	Excipient
Sandoz Inc	iron sucrose	0781-3485	SODIUM HYDROXIDE
Sandoz Inc	iron sucrose	0781-3485	WATER
Mylan Institutional LLC	iron sucrose	67457-957	WATER
International Medication Systems Limited	iron sucrose	76329-9200	SODIUM CHLORIDE

What are the Most Frequently-Used Excipients in IRON SUCROSE?

# Of NDCs	Excipient
1	SODIUM CHLORIDE
2	SODIUM HYDROXIDE
3	WATER

Iron Sucrose Excipient Strategy and Commercial Opportunities

Last updated: October 30, 2026

Iron sucrose is a mature intravenous iron product with limited conventional patent protection and substantial formulation sensitivity. The commercial opportunity is concentrated in reliable sterile manufacturing, supply-chain efficiency, differentiated presentations, hospital contracting, dialysis distribution and international registration. The core formulation uses a polynuclear iron(III)-oxyhydroxide complex stabilized with sucrose in water for injection. Sodium hydroxide is used for pH adjustment in marketed products. The excipient platform leaves little room for formulation substitution because changes can affect colloidal stability, free iron, infusion tolerability, particle-size distribution and bioequivalence.

What is the approved iron sucrose formulation?

Iron sucrose injection is an aqueous colloidal complex containing iron(III) and sucrose. The standard concentration is 20 mg/mL of elemental iron, typically supplied in 5 mL single-dose vials containing 100 mg of iron.

Formulation attribute	Typical marketed specification
Active complex	Iron sucrose, an iron(III)-oxyhydroxide/sucrose complex
Elemental iron concentration	20 mg/mL
Common vial strength	100 mg iron in 5 mL
Route	Intravenous injection or infusion
Primary vehicle	Water for injection
Stabilizing carbohydrate	Sucrose, incorporated into the iron complex
pH adjustment	Sodium hydroxide
Preservative	Generally preservative-free, single-dose presentation
Container	Type I glass vial with elastomeric closure
Diluent	0.9% sodium chloride when dilution is specified
Storage	Controlled room temperature; product-specific label applies

The U.S. Venofer label identifies sodium hydroxide and water for injection as inactive ingredients, while sucrose is integral to the iron-sucrose complex rather than simply an incidental excipient. The product is alkaline, with a labeled pH generally in the range of approximately 10.5 to 11.1. Commercial manufacturers must control the complex rather than only the nominal list of ingredients.[1]

What does sucrose do in iron sucrose?

Sucrose stabilizes the iron oxyhydroxide core and moderates the release of iron after intravenous administration. It is not interchangeable with a conventional bulking agent or simple tonicity modifier. Its molecular weight distribution, degree of association with the iron core and manufacturing conditions affect the resulting colloid.

The commercial value of sucrose is therefore functional:

• It limits uncontrolled release of labile iron.
• It supports formation of a stable aqueous complex.
• It affects the iron-carbohydrate complex profile.
• It contributes to the product’s pharmacokinetic and safety characteristics.
• It creates a quality-control requirement beyond standard small-molecule assay testing.

A manufacturer that changes the source, grade or process conditions for sucrose must evaluate the impact on the iron complex, not only perform an excipient compatibility check.

Which excipients are protected by iron sucrose formulation patents?

The principal iron sucrose formulation is not protected by a meaningful current U.S. Orange Book patent estate. Venofer was approved in the United States in 2000 under NDA 020909. The product’s commercial protection has primarily ended through the age of the product, generic competition and the absence of a substantial active patent barrier in the Orange Book.[1,2]

Protection category	Current commercial significance
Original iron-sucrose composition	Foundational protection is expired or commercially exhausted
Sucrose-containing complex	Core product identity; not a practical standalone exclusivity barrier
Sodium hydroxide pH adjustment	Routine formulation element with low patent value
Water-for-injection vehicle	No meaningful exclusivity
Vial and closure system	Potential device or packaging claims, usually narrow
Manufacturing process	May retain trade-secret value even when product patents have expired
Premixed infusion formulation	Potentially protectable, but requires regulatory and clinical differentiation
Ready-to-use presentation	Potential commercial differentiation; patentability depends on technical improvement

The Orange Book should be reviewed for the specific reference product and dosage form before any Paragraph IV strategy is developed. In practice, iron sucrose is generally treated as a product with limited or no current U.S. listed-patent exposure compared with newer complex injectable drugs.[2]

When did iron sucrose lose exclusivity?

The principal U.S. market exclusivity period for Venofer has expired. The product was approved in 2000, and multiple generic iron sucrose injections have since entered the market. The current competitive question is therefore not whether basic iron sucrose can be copied, but whether a new formulation, presentation or manufacturing process can create a defensible regulatory or commercial position.

How strong is the iron sucrose patent estate?

The patent estate is weak for a conventional generic injection and stronger for process know-how.

Product patents

A basic iron sucrose injection has limited patentability because the composition is mature and the key ingredients are known. A new patent would need to claim a demonstrable technical improvement, such as:

• A materially narrower and more reproducible iron-core distribution.
• Lower levels of labile iron.
• Improved stability after dilution.
• Reduced immunogenicity or infusion reactions.
• A new concentration that preserves safety and stability.
• A novel container or oxygen-control system.
• A technically superior manufacturing step.

A claim directed only to iron sucrose, sucrose and water is unlikely to provide a durable competitive barrier.

Process patents and trade secrets

Manufacturing process control is more valuable than conventional excipient patenting. Relevant know-how may include:

• Iron salt addition order.
• Temperature and reaction-time profile.
• Alkalinization rate.
• Mixing energy and shear.
• Control of iron-core nucleation.
• Sucrose-to-iron ratio.
• Filtration and bioburden-control conditions.
• Holding time before sterile filtration.
• Container-closure interaction.
• Control of visible and subvisible particles.

Some of these parameters may be patentable when they produce a measurable product advantage. Trade-secret protection is often more practical because process conditions can be difficult to detect from the finished vial.

What formulation opportunities exist for iron sucrose?

The best opportunities are incremental presentations that reduce administration burden without materially changing the complex.

Higher-concentration or low-volume injection

A higher-concentration presentation could reduce vial count, preparation time and infusion volume. The development risks include:

• Increased viscosity.
• Greater sensitivity to precipitation.
• Higher local concentration during administration.
• Changed osmolality.
• New infusion-rate requirements.
• More difficult sterile filtration.
• Potentially different bioequivalence or clinical-bridging requirements.

A low-volume 40 mg/mL product could have commercial value in high-throughput dialysis or outpatient infusion settings, but it would need a strong stability and administration rationale.

Ready-to-use infusion bags

A premixed sodium-chloride presentation could eliminate pharmacy compounding and reduce preparation errors. The commercial case is strongest in hospitals, ambulatory infusion centers and dialysis clinics.

Key development issues include:

• Stability in the bag over the proposed shelf life.
• Adsorption to the bag or tubing.
• Interaction with plasticizers.
• Leachables and extractables.
• Dilution-related changes in particle distribution.
• Light exposure.
• Cold-chain or temperature excursions.
• Compatibility with common infusion sets.

A premixed product could support a new patent family if the bag composition, concentration, stabilizer system or storage period provides a non-obvious technical improvement.

Pediatric and weight-based presentations

Lower-dose vials or prefilled syringes could reduce waste in pediatric and small-adult dosing. The syringe opportunity is constrained by the need to maintain suspension or colloidal uniformity, avoid adsorption and ensure dose accuracy. A prefilled syringe may also trigger container-closure, device-combination-product and human-factors requirements.

Lyophilized iron sucrose

A lyophilized version is technically possible as a concept but commercially difficult. Reconstitution would add operational complexity to a product currently supplied as a ready-to-use solution. The approach would need a clear benefit, such as improved stability or international supply-chain resilience.

Preservative-containing multidose products

A multidose vial is generally unattractive for intravenous iron. Preservatives may create compatibility, safety and regulatory problems, while the existing single-dose vial format is already accepted in hospitals. A preservative-free multidose technology would require substantial container and sterility justification.

What regulatory pathway applies to generic iron sucrose?

Generic iron sucrose products are generally developed through the abbreviated new drug application pathway under the Hatch-Waxman framework. The principal regulatory challenge is demonstrating sameness or equivalence for a complex iron-carbohydrate product, not merely matching chemical assay.

FDA’s product-specific guidance addresses the development of iron sucrose injection and emphasizes comparative characterization, quality attributes and clinical or pharmacokinetic evidence appropriate to the product.[3]

Important quality attributes include:

• Total iron content.
• Iron oxidation state.
• Sucrose content.
• Iron-to-sucrose ratio.
• Molecular-weight distribution.
• Particle-size distribution.
• Labile iron.
• Free sucrose.
• pH and osmolality.
• Viscosity.
• Sterility and endotoxin.
• Subvisible and visible particulate matter.
• Release of iron under physiologic conditions.

The complex nature of iron sucrose reduces the value of a simple “same ingredients” strategy. A generic manufacturer needs a robust analytical package and a process capable of producing a reproducible complex batch after batch.

What FDA exclusivity and Orange Book status apply to iron sucrose?

The FDA exclusivity risk is low for the mature reference product.

Regulatory issue	Iron sucrose position
Reference product	Venofer, NDA 020909
Original U.S. approval	2000
Current generic competition	Established
New chemical entity exclusivity	Expired
Orphan exclusivity	Not the principal protection mechanism
Biosimilar pathway	Not applicable; iron sucrose is not a biologic
Orange Book patent risk	Limited for conventional product; verify current listing
Paragraph IV relevance	Primarily relevant only if a listed patent is identified for the target product
180-day generic exclusivity	Depends on the specific ANDA and patent-certification history
505(b)(2) opportunity	Potentially relevant for materially modified dosage forms or presentations

Iron sucrose is not a biosimilar. It is a complex nonbiologic drug product. Its regulatory challenge resembles other complex injectable products in that the finished product’s quality profile and pharmacology depend on manufacturing conditions, but the statutory pathway is not the Purple Book pathway used for biologics.[4]

Which companies compete in iron sucrose?

The market includes the reference product and multiple generic manufacturers. Competition is usually based on price, supply continuity, contract terms, shortage performance and hospital formulary access.

Competitive group	Typical commercial strategy
Vifor/CSL-related reference supply	Brand recognition, dialysis and institutional relationships
Large generic injectable manufacturers	Low-cost vials, broad hospital contracting
Specialty injectable companies	Regional supply and niche institutional accounts
Contract manufacturers	Private-label or licensed supply
International manufacturers	Local registration, tender pricing and government procurement

The most attractive customer segments are dialysis providers, hospital systems, outpatient infusion centers and government tenders. Dialysis is especially relevant because iron replacement is embedded in recurring treatment workflows and administered under professional supervision.

What manufacturing barriers affect iron sucrose?

The largest barrier is process reproducibility. A company may be able to source all raw materials yet fail to produce a product that matches the reference complex.

Critical manufacturing risks include:

1. Variable iron-core formation.
2. Batch-to-batch changes in molecular-weight distribution.
3. Elevated labile iron.
4. Filter fouling during sterile filtration.
5. Visible particles after storage or dilution.
6. Container-closure interaction.
7. Metal contamination from process equipment.
8. Instability during temperature excursions.
9. Inconsistent release after dilution in saline.
10. Scale-up changes caused by mixing and heat-transfer differences.

Facility design also matters. Iron-containing solutions require strong control of metals, cleaning validation, particulate generation and equipment compatibility. Sterile injectable manufacturing capacity is a commercial asset because contract manufacturing slots are constrained and technology transfer can take materially longer than for a conventional tablet.

What generic entry risks exist for a new iron sucrose product?

Low-risk conventional generic

A 100 mg/5 mL preservative-free vial that closely matches the reference product faces limited patent risk but significant price competition. The principal risks are regulatory comparability, manufacturing yield, supply reliability and contracting.

Moderate-risk differentiated generic

A new concentration, smaller vial or private-label presentation may achieve better margins but can create new regulatory questions. The product must show that the presentation does not change dosing safety, administration practices or complex behavior.

Higher-risk reformulation

A ready-to-use bag, prefilled syringe or extended-stability product can create higher value but may require additional clinical, compatibility and device evidence. The business case depends on avoiding a price-only market.

What patent litigation and settlements affect iron sucrose?

Iron sucrose has no widely recognized current U.S. patent litigation comparable to high-value branded products with active composition or method-of-use patents. Generic entry has already occurred, and the commercial center of gravity has moved from Paragraph IV litigation to manufacturing, contracting and supply performance.

Settlement agreements are therefore less likely to determine market timing than in newer products. Any diligence should focus on:

• Current Orange Book listings.
• ANDA litigation records under 21 U.S.C. § 355(j).
• FDA approval dates for competing ANDAs.
• Any product-specific injunction.
• Supply or licensing agreements.
• Private-label distribution arrangements.
• Manufacturing technology-transfer restrictions.

How does iron sucrose compare with newer intravenous iron products?

Attribute	Iron sucrose	Ferric carboxymaltose	Ferumoxytol	Ferric derisomaltose
Typical administration	Multiple smaller doses	Often larger dose per visit	Larger dose per visit	Large-dose replacement
Basic complex	Iron-sucrose	Iron-carboxymaltose	Iron oxide-polyol complex	Iron-isomaltoside/derisomaltose
Patent maturity	Mature	More recent, stronger historic estate	More recent	More recent
Generic competition	Established	More limited by jurisdiction and product	More limited	More limited
Excipient flexibility	Low	Low	Low	Low
Main commercial advantage	Familiarity and price	High-dose convenience	High-dose convenience	High-dose convenience
Main opportunity	Cost, supply and presentation	Dose convenience and access	Similar	Similar

Iron sucrose is commercially disadvantaged in visit frequency but advantaged by maturity, physician familiarity, established guidelines and generic pricing. An excipient strategy should target operational efficiency rather than attempt to reposition iron sucrose as a high-dose replacement product without supporting clinical and regulatory evidence.

What licensing and commercial opportunities exist?

Licensing opportunities are strongest in three areas:

Manufacturing technology

A company with validated iron-complex manufacturing know-how can license process technology to regional injectable manufacturers. The value lies in faster development, lower batch-failure risk and improved regulatory documentation.

Ready-to-use presentations

A premixed bag or other low-preparation product can support regional licensing where hospital pharmacy labor costs are high. Licensing economics improve if the product has a registered stability advantage or a protected container system.

Geographic expansion

Iron sucrose remains relevant in markets where newer high-dose products are expensive or unavailable. Commercial opportunities include:

• Latin American hospital tenders.
• Middle Eastern and North African dialysis networks.
• Asian public-sector procurement.
• European hospital and dialysis contracts.
• Private-label supply in regulated and semi-regulated markets.

International patent risk is generally lower for the mature core product, but manufacturing, registration and local tender requirements can determine market access. Each jurisdiction requires separate review of formulation claims, process patents, data exclusivity and authorized-manufacturer rules.

Key Takeaways

• Iron sucrose is a mature injectable complex with limited current U.S. patent protection.
• Sucrose is a functional stabilizing component of the iron complex, not a freely interchangeable excipient.
• Sodium hydroxide and water for injection provide a simple formulation platform, but process control determines product quality.
• The strongest defensible assets are manufacturing know-how, analytical characterization and sterile supply reliability.
• Conventional generic vials face low patent risk and high price pressure.
• Premixed bags, higher-concentration products, smaller-dose vials and prefilled systems offer higher commercial differentiation.
• FDA development depends on complex-product characterization, not only assay and sterility matching.
• Iron sucrose is not a biosimilar product and does not use the Purple Book pathway.
• Dialysis, hospital systems, outpatient infusion and government tenders are the main commercial channels.
• Litigation and Paragraph IV activity are less important than manufacturing execution, contracting and geographic registration.

FAQs

Is sucrose in iron sucrose an inactive ingredient?

Sucrose is integral to the iron-carbohydrate complex and stabilizes the iron oxyhydroxide core. Product labeling may list only water for injection and sodium hydroxide as inactive ingredients because sucrose is part of the active iron complex definition.

Can iron sucrose be formulated with a different carbohydrate?

A different carbohydrate would create a different iron-carbohydrate complex and could materially change pharmacology, stability and regulatory classification. Such a product would require a new development and comparability strategy rather than a routine excipient substitution.

Does iron sucrose have biosimilar competition?

No. Iron sucrose is a nonbiologic complex drug product. Competitors are generally approved as generic or otherwise abbreviated nonbiologic products, not biosimilars.

Can iron sucrose be sold in a prefilled syringe?

A prefilled syringe is a potential commercial presentation, but it requires assessment of syringe-material compatibility, dose accuracy, particle control, container closure, device performance and applicable combination-product requirements.

What is the most valuable patent strategy for iron sucrose?

The most credible strategy targets a measurable technical improvement, such as superior stability, lower labile iron, a controlled complex distribution, improved dilution performance or a novel high-value presentation. A patent limited to iron sucrose, water and pH adjustment is unlikely to create strong exclusivity.

References

1. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2023). Venofer (iron sucrose) injection prescribing information. FDA.

2. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2024). Approved drug products with therapeutic equivalence evaluations: Orange Book. FDA.

3. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2013). Product-specific guidance for iron sucrose injection. FDA.

4. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2024). Purple Book: Database of licensed biological products. FDA.

5. U.S. Pharmacopeial Convention. (2024). United States Pharmacopeia and National Formulary. USP.