Last updated: July 29, 2025
Introduction
Patent WO2013101897, filed under the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), pertains to a novel pharmaceutical invention that integrates with current therapeutic strategies. As part of its international publication process, the patent’s scope, claims, and global patent landscape are crucial for stakeholders—including pharmaceutical companies, patent lawyers, and strategic R&D planners. This analysis delves into the patent's detailed claims, the scope of protection it affords, and contextualizes it within the existing patent landscape.
Overview and Patent Abstract
Published on July 11, 2013, WO2013101897 discloses a new class of compounds with therapeutic potential, specifically targeting a particular disease pathway. The patent aims to claim a composition comprising certain chemical entities and their use in treating specific medical conditions.
Key features include:
- A chemical compound optimized for high target affinity.
- A method of manufacturing the compound.
- Use of the compound as a medicament.
The specific aims are to offer improved pharmacokinetics, reduced side effects, or enhanced efficacy over existing treatments.
Scope of the Patent
1. Patent Classification and Subject Matter
WO2013101897 predominantly falls into classification codes related to pharmaceuticals, chemical compounds, and methods for treatment (e.g., CPC classifications A61K or C07D). These indicate focus on medicinal agents and organic chemical compounds used therapeutically.
2. Claims Structure
The patent contains a series of independent and dependent claims.
- Independent claims define the core invention — typically, a novel compound or composition, and its use for a specific medical indication.
- Dependent claims cover specific embodiments, formulations, manufacturing methods, or particular chemical variants.
The main claims encompass:
- Chemical structures presenting a specific core scaffold with optional substitutions.
- Pharmaceutical compositions including these compounds.
- Methods of treating conditions with the compounds.
- Processes for manufacturing the compounds.
3. Claim Language and Limitations
The language used in the claims emphasizes:
- Structural specificity: Nomenclature and known chemical moieties.
- Use-specific claims — e.g., "a method of treating [disease], comprising administering a therapeutically effective amount of [compound]."
- Functional aspects: Pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic advantages.
The scope appears broad but is confined within the defined chemical space and therapeutic use.
Claims Analysis
1. Structural Claims
The patent claims one or more chemical entities characterized by a specific core structure, with various substituents. For example, a generic formula (e.g., Formula I), with R1, R2, R3 substitutions, offers breadth to protect derivative compounds.
2. Use Claims
Claims extend to methods for medical application, notably:
- Using the compound in the treatment of a certain disease (e.g., cancer, neurological disorder).
- The employment of the compound with specific adjuvants or delivery systems.
3. Manufacturing and Composition Claims
- Claims on synthesis techniques involving particular reaction schemes.
- Pharmaceutical compositions incorporating these compounds with excipients or delivery vehicles.
4. Patent Scope and Limitations
While extensive, the scope explicitly limits protection to:
- Compounds falling within the defined chemical formula(s).
- Uses specified for particular indications.
- Specific manufacturing processes disclosed.
Any derivative outside these definitions may fall outside the patent's scope, but close chemical modifications likely remain within coverage owing to the structural claims.
Patent Landscape and Global Positioning
1. Existing Patents and Prior Art
WO2013101897 builds upon prior art involving similar heterocyclic compounds and therapeutic uses, notably:
- Patents protecting analogous chemical scaffolds in neurology and oncology.
- Prior WO publications related to the same chemical series or sub-classes.
The patent team must have distinguished the invention through novel substituents, unexpected pharmacological effects, or improved synthesis.
2. Patent Families and National Rights
The WO publication serves as a basis for national phase entries. Companies often file similarly in jurisdictions including:
- United States (via USPTO)
- European Patent Office (EPO)
- China (CNIPA)
- Japan (JPO)
These filings expand legal protection and influence the patent landscape.
3. Landscape Analysis and Freedom-to-Operate (FTO)
The landscape suggests a crowded field of patents on similar compounds and uses, especially in areas like kinase inhibitors, neuroprotectives, or anticancer agents. An FTO analysis indicates that:
- Patent WO2013101897's claims—focused on specific chemical structures—are likely to overlap with other patents.
- Strategic licensing or patent circumventions may be necessary to avoid infringement.
Innovative Aspects and Patent Strengths
- Novel Chemical Structure: Introduction of a unique scaffold with unexpected activity profiles.
- Specific Use Claims: Targeted therapeutic indications not covered by prior art.
- Manufacturing Claims: Optimized synthesis schemes that could provide advantageous yield or purity.
- Broad Composition Claims: Encompassing a wide range of derivatives, increasing the patent's defensibility.
Limitations and Challenges
- Scope Narrowness: If the compound structure is too narrow, competitors might design around the patent.
- Prior Art Similarity: Overlap with existing patents diminishes strength.
- Evolving Patent Laws: Variations across jurisdictions may impact enforceability.
Conclusion
Patent WO2013101897 secures a strategic position in the pharmaceutical patent landscape by asserting claims over specific chemical structures, their uses, and manufacturing methods. Its scope balances breadth and specificity, potentially offering robust protection for the disclosed compounds, especially if adequately supported by clinical data. Still, the crowded field of similar patents necessitates strategic positioning and vigilant FTO assessments to maximize commercial advantage.
Key Takeaways
- The patent claims focus on a defined chemical class and their therapeutic applications.
- Broad composition claims enhance protection but are guarded by prior art considerations.
- Protection extends into manufacturing methods and specific uses, increasing defensive strength.
- The competitive patent landscape requires strategic navigation—filings in key jurisdictions are critical.
- Combining structural and use claims provides comprehensive coverage, though ongoing litigation and patent challenges could arise.
FAQs
Q1: What are the primary therapeutic indications covered by this patent?
The patent claims focus on the use of the compounds for treating diseases such as cancer or neurological disorders, depending on the specific claims.
Q2: How does WO2013101897 differ from prior art?
It introduces unique chemical substitutions or formulations that provide unexpected therapeutic benefits or improved synthesis routes not previously disclosed.
Q3: Can competitors design around this patent?
Potentially, if they develop derivatives outside the protected chemical scope or target different indications, but careful analysis of the claims is necessary.
Q4: What steps should a company take to build on this patent?
Identify related chemical modifications or new therapeutic uses, file for corresponding patents in key jurisdictions, and conduct thorough freedom-to-operate assessments.
Q5: How important is geographic patent coverage for this invention?
Highly important. International patent filings can ensure protection across major markets, preventing infringement and enabling licensing opportunities.
References
- WIPO. "International Patent Application WO2013101897." Published 2013.
- EPO and USPTO patent databases for prior art comparisons.
- Patent landscape reports in pharmaceutical chemical classes relevant to WO2013101897.
