List of Excipients in Branded Drug SAXAGLIPTIN AND METFORMIN

« Back to Dashboard

Generic Drugs Containing SAXAGLIPTIN AND METFORMIN

Company	Ingredient	NDC	Excipient
Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc	saxagliptin and metformin	0378-8175	AMMONIA
Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc	saxagliptin and metformin	0378-8175	CARBOMER HOMOPOLYMER TYPE A
Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc	saxagliptin and metformin	0378-8175	FERRIC OXIDE RED

What are the Most Frequently-Used Excipients in SAXAGLIPTIN AND METFORMIN?

# Of NDCs	Excipient
1	AMMONIA
1	CARBOMER HOMOPOLYMER TYPE A
1	FERRIC OXIDE RED

Saxagliptin and Metformin Excipient Strategy and Commercial Opportunities

Last updated: September 24, 2026

Saxagliptin/metformin extended-release is a small-molecule fixed-dose combination marketed in the United States as Kombiglyze XR. Its commercial opportunity is primarily generic substitution, reformulation, regional licensing, and excipient-enabled improvements in extended-release performance. The product is not a biologic, so biosimilar competition does not apply. The main technical barriers are metformin’s high dose, gastrointestinal tolerability, tablet size, prolonged-release control, and the need to prevent alcohol-induced dose dumping.

What product is protected by saxagliptin and metformin?

Kombiglyze XR combines saxagliptin hydrochloride, a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor, with metformin hydrochloride, a biguanide antihyperglycemic. The product is administered once daily and is available in multiple strengths, including combinations containing 2.5 mg or 5 mg of saxagliptin with 500 mg or 1,000 mg of metformin hydrochloride.

Product attribute	Commercial and technical relevance
Brand	Kombiglyze XR
Active ingredients	Saxagliptin hydrochloride and metformin hydrochloride
Dosage form	Oral extended-release tablet
FDA application	NDA 022350
Initial U.S. approval	2010
Therapeutic area	Type 2 diabetes
Generic pathway	Abbreviated New Drug Application, subject to listed-patent and exclusivity status
Biosimilar pathway	Not applicable
Main formulation challenge	Controlling metformin release while maintaining saxagliptin stability and bioequivalence
Primary commercial users	Generic manufacturers, regional licensees, contract manufacturers, and excipient suppliers

The FDA label directs administration once daily with the evening meal. The extended-release tablet must be swallowed whole. Crushing, splitting, or chewing can disrupt release characteristics and increase exposure risk.[1]

What excipients are used in saxagliptin/metformin extended-release tablets?

The reference product uses a hydrophilic matrix-style extended-release architecture. The label identifies excipient categories that include hypromellose, microcrystalline cellulose, povidone, magnesium stearate, sodium carboxymethylcellulose, silicon dioxide, and film-coating components such as titanium dioxide, talc, and iron oxides.[1]

The exact grade, substitution level, viscosity, particle-size distribution, and manufacturing sequence are as important as the chemical identity of each excipient.

Core excipient functions

Excipient class	Likely function in the dosage form	Development consideration
Hypromellose	Hydrophilic matrix former and release-controlling polymer	Viscosity grade controls hydration, gel strength, and metformin release
Microcrystalline cellulose	Diluent and compression aid	Supports tablet hardness and manufacturability
Povidone	Binder and granulation aid	Affects granule strength and dissolution reproducibility
Sodium carboxymethylcellulose	Matrix modifier and swelling agent	Can alter water penetration and release kinetics
Magnesium stearate	Lubricant	Excessive lubrication can reduce tablet wettability and dissolution
Colloidal silicon dioxide	Glidant and flow aid	Controls powder flow and content uniformity
Film-coating polymers	Protection, identification, and swallowability	Coating weight must not materially alter release
Iron oxides and titanium dioxide	Color and product identification	Support strength differentiation and counterfeit control

The commercial implication is that a generic developer cannot treat excipients as interchangeable commodities. A substitution from one hypromellose supplier to another may preserve the same compendial name but change viscosity, hydration rate, compression behavior, and dissolution.

Which excipient strategy is most suitable for a generic product?

The lowest-risk strategy is to reproduce the reference product’s release mechanism using a conventional hydrophilic matrix. The objective is not to create a novel excipient system. It is to match the reference product’s in vitro dissolution and in vivo pharmacokinetic profile while reducing manufacturing cost.

A practical development sequence is:

1. Establish the reference tablet’s dimensions, hardness, friability, density, disintegration behavior, and dissolution profile.
2. Screen hypromellose grades across viscosity and particle-size ranges.
3. Optimize metformin loading, binder level, lubricant concentration, and granulation moisture.
4. Test saxagliptin uniformity at the low-dose strengths, where segregation risk is greater.
5. Evaluate dissolution in media that capture pH changes and gastrointestinal transit.
6. Conduct alcohol dose-dumping studies.
7. Confirm fed and fasting bioequivalence under the applicable FDA product-specific guidance.

The high metformin loading makes direct compression attractive from a cost standpoint, but roller compaction or wet granulation may provide better control of flow, segregation, and tablet strength. The preferred process depends on the selected API particle size and the compressibility of the metformin grade.

What formulation patents protect saxagliptin and metformin?

The relevant intellectual-property estate is centered on the fixed-dose extended-release combination, formulation architecture, manufacturing processes, and method-of-use claims. API patents covering saxagliptin alone are less likely to be the principal barrier for a current generic applicant than patents directed to the combination product.

The U.S. reference product has been associated with AstraZeneca and its affiliates. Patent records and FDA Orange Book listings should be assessed by product strength and application because listed patents, expiration dates, pediatric extensions, terminal disclaimers, and litigation outcomes can differ.

Patent category	Relevance to a generic applicant
Saxagliptin compound patents	May affect early historical entry, but many compound rights are older than the combination-product estate
Metformin patents	Generally limited commercial significance because metformin is an established generic active ingredient
Fixed-dose combination patents	Potentially relevant to the product composition and strength combinations
Extended-release formulation patents	Can cover matrix composition, release rate, or dosage-form structure
Method-of-use patents	May cover treatment of type 2 diabetes or specific patient populations
Manufacturing patents	Can create process-specific risk, particularly if the generic uses a similar granulation or coating process
Drug-device patents	Generally less important because the product is a conventional tablet

The Orange Book is the controlling source for listed U.S. patents and regulatory exclusivity. Patent expiration should not be inferred from the original filing date alone. Patent-term adjustment, patent-term extension, terminal disclaimers, reissued claims, and settlement agreements can change the effective entry analysis.[2]

When does saxagliptin/metformin lose exclusivity?

The commercial loss of exclusivity has two separate components: regulatory exclusivity and patent exclusivity.

Regulatory exclusivity

Kombiglyze XR was approved in 2010 as a new drug application. The original five-year new chemical entity exclusivity period would have expired before the current generic-entry analysis. Any later three-year exclusivity would have depended on qualifying new clinical investigations and the specific approval supplement. No biologic exclusivity period applies.

Patent exclusivity

The combination product’s patent position must be reviewed in the current Orange Book and in Federal Register or district-court records. A generic company may file an ANDA with Paragraph IV certifications before patent expiry, but commercial launch depends on litigation, settlement terms, court decisions, and any agreed launch date.

The practical conclusion is that the key date is not simply the earliest saxagliptin patent expiry. It is the earliest date on which a generic can launch without violating enforceable formulation or combination patents.

Are Paragraph IV challenges likely for this product?

Yes. Saxagliptin/metformin is a conventional small-molecule combination with a large metformin component and a low-dose saxagliptin component. Those characteristics make it suitable for ANDA development, particularly after core regulatory exclusivity has expired.

Paragraph IV risk is concentrated in:

• Fixed-dose combination patents.
• Extended-release matrix patents.
• Claims covering specific saxagliptin-to-metformin ratios.
• Method-of-use claims that remain listed.
• Manufacturing claims that may be asserted against a process materially similar to the reference process.

A generic applicant generally has four strategic options:

Strategy	Commercial effect
Paragraph III certification	Delays launch until relevant patent expiry
Paragraph IV certification	Enables an earlier challenge but creates litigation exposure
Section viii carve-out	Removes a patented method of use from the label where legally viable
Settlement	May provide a negotiated launch date and limit litigation costs

The low-dose saxagliptin strengths may create additional formulation risk because content uniformity and segregation become more difficult as the active ingredient concentration falls.

What commercial opportunities exist for excipient suppliers?

Excipient suppliers have several opportunities beyond selling commodity fillers.

High-viscosity polymer systems

Hypromellose and related hydrophilic polymers are central to release control. Suppliers can differentiate through:

• Consistent viscosity across lots.
• Narrow particle-size distributions.
• Lower microbial and elemental impurity profiles.
• Improved compressibility.
• Predictable hydration in high-drug-load tablets.
• Regulatory support for multiple global markets.

A supplier that can reduce dissolution variability across scale-up batches may gain more value than one offering only a lower unit price.

Direct-compression metformin grades

Metformin’s high dose creates tablet-size and compression problems. Specialty metformin grades designed for direct compression can reduce granulation steps, improve throughput, and lower solvent use. The commercial opportunity is strongest where the excipient also improves tablet hardness without slowing dissolution excessively.

Lubrication systems

Magnesium stearate remains common, but lubrication can reduce wetting and alter release. Alternative lubricants or optimized preblends may support faster manufacturing while maintaining dissolution. Any substitution requires comparative dissolution and bioequivalence justification.

Coating systems

Ready-to-use film-coating systems can reduce batch complexity and support color-coded strength identification. For a multi-strength product, coating technology can reduce mix-up risk and simplify visual inspection.

What formulation innovations could create differentiated products?

A conventional generic is the largest near-term opportunity. More differentiated products require a stronger regulatory and clinical rationale.

Potential development concepts include:

1. A smaller tablet using higher-density excipients or a more efficient matrix.
2. A bilayer tablet separating saxagliptin from the metformin release matrix.
3. A multiparticulate capsule containing controlled-release granules.
4. A lower-gastrointestinal-irritation formulation.
5. A regional product using a different strength combination.
6. A tablet optimized for patients with swallowing difficulty, provided the altered administration method is supported by regulatory data.
7. A combination product paired with a digital adherence or refill-management program.

A sprinkle formulation or chewable product would not be an ordinary ANDA substitution if the reference labeling requires the tablet to be swallowed whole. It could require a different regulatory strategy, depending on the formulation, indication, and labeling changes.

How does saxagliptin/metformin compare with competing diabetes combinations?

The product competes with other DPP-4/metformin combinations, including sitagliptin/metformin, linagliptin/metformin, and alogliptin/metformin products. It also competes indirectly with SGLT2/metformin and GLP-1-based regimens.

Product class	Excipient and formulation opportunity	Competitive issue
Saxagliptin/metformin ER	Matrix-release optimization and generic cost reduction	DPP-4 class faces competition from newer mechanisms
Sitagliptin/metformin	Large established generic market	Strong physician familiarity and broad historical use
Linagliptin/metformin	Tablet-size and fixed-dose optimization	Different renal-dosing profile may influence prescribing
SGLT2/metformin	Release control and combination adherence	Cardiovascular and renal outcome positioning
GLP-1 products	Device and delivery-system innovation	Higher clinical differentiation but greater manufacturing complexity

The commercial case for saxagliptin/metformin is strongest in price-sensitive markets, formularies that retain DPP-4 use, and territories where once-daily fixed-dose combinations remain commercially relevant.

What manufacturing and geographic barriers exist?

The formulation is technically portable, but regulatory execution is jurisdiction-specific. A manufacturer must manage:

• Different reference-product standards.
• Local requirements for bioequivalence and fed/fasted studies.
• Excipient acceptance differences across jurisdictions.
• Nitrosamine and elemental impurity controls.
• Stability performance under hot and humid conditions.
• Packaging that protects the extended-release tablet from moisture.
• Local patent and supplementary-protection-certificate rights.

The largest manufacturing barrier is not API synthesis. It is reproducible scale-up of a high-dose extended-release tablet with consistent dissolution across commercial batches.

What is the revenue exposure and generic-launch outlook?

Revenue exposure is driven by three factors: the size of the remaining branded market, the number of approved generic applicants, and the timing of first commercial entry. The first approved generic may obtain a material price advantage if it launches before broad competition. After multiple entrants, price erosion is likely to accelerate.

The product is more attractive as part of a diabetes portfolio than as a stand-alone asset. A manufacturer can leverage shared excipient platforms, metformin manufacturing capacity, coating infrastructure, and sales channels across several combination products.

The strongest commercial models are:

• Early ANDA entry supported by Paragraph IV litigation.
• Low-cost multi-strength generic manufacturing.
• Regional licensing in markets without extensive local competition.
• Contract development and manufacturing for private-label diabetes portfolios.
• Polymer and process licensing for extended-release platforms.

Key Takeaways

• Saxagliptin/metformin is a small-molecule fixed-dose combination, so generic rather than biosimilar competition is the relevant pathway.
• The central formulation problem is controlling release from a high-dose metformin tablet while maintaining low-dose saxagliptin uniformity.
• Hypromellose, sodium carboxymethylcellulose, binders, lubricants, and coating systems materially affect dissolution and manufacturability.
• The most practical generic strategy is a conventional hydrophilic matrix formulation that matches the reference product.
• Patent risk is concentrated in combination, extended-release, method-of-use, and manufacturing claims rather than metformin itself.
• The Orange Book and litigation records must control any current launch-date analysis.
• Excipient suppliers can create value through polymer consistency, direct-compression metformin grades, lubrication control, and ready-to-use coating systems.
• The product is most commercially attractive within a broader diabetes generic portfolio.

FAQs

Is saxagliptin/metformin a biologic or small-molecule product?

It is a small-molecule oral drug combination. FDA biosimilar regulations do not apply.

Can a generic manufacturer change the excipients?

Yes, an ANDA may use different inactive ingredients if the formulation meets applicable FDA requirements and demonstrates pharmaceutical equivalence and bioequivalence. The change cannot compromise release performance or safety.

Which excipient controls metformin release?

Hypromellose is typically the principal release-controlling polymer, with sodium carboxymethylcellulose and process variables modifying hydration and diffusion.

Does a new saxagliptin/metformin strength require a new patent strategy?

Potentially. A new strength can require a separate regulatory assessment and may be affected by formulation, composition, method-of-use, or patent claims that do not apply uniformly across all strengths.

Is alcohol dose dumping a major development risk?

Yes. Extended-release metformin products must be evaluated for accelerated release in alcohol-containing media. Failure can create both regulatory and commercial barriers.

References

1. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2017). Kombiglyze XR (saxagliptin and metformin hydrochloride extended-release) prescribing information.
2. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2024). Approved drug products with therapeutic equivalence evaluations.
3. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2018). Waiver of in vivo bioavailability and bioequivalence studies for immediate-release solid oral dosage forms based on a biopharmaceutics classification system.
4. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2023). Product-specific guidances for generic drug development.
5. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2024). Inactive ingredient database.