Details for Patent: 10,537,538
Which drugs does patent 10,537,538 protect, and when does it expire?
Patent 10,537,538 protects TIROSINT-SOL and is included in one NDA.
This patent has thirteen patent family members in eleven countries.
Summary for Patent: 10,537,538
| Title: | High-stability packaged solutions of T4 thyroid hormone | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Abstract: | The invention relates to highly stable alcohol-free, water-glycerol solutions of T4 thyroid hormone, with a reduced amount of T3 impurity, packaged via specific container arrangements. The containers are multi-barrier ones, in which a number of layers of specific materials separate the solution from contact with the external environment. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Inventor(s): | Tiziano Fossati, Lorenzo Bellorini, Marco Pizzutti | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Assignee: | Altergon SA | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Application Number: | US15/445,900 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Patent Litigation and PTAB cases: | See patent lawsuits and PTAB cases for patent 10,537,538 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Patent Claim Types: see list of patent claims | Composition; Formulation; | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Patent landscape, scope, and claims: | United States Patent 10,537,538: Claim Scope, Exclusivity, and Patent Landscape for Liquid T4 Thyroid PreparationsU.S. Patent No. 10,537,538 protects a packaged, ready-to-use liquid thyroid preparation containing T4 in an alcohol-free 85% glycerol-in-water vehicle, supplied in a one-component LDPE single-dose container enclosed in a multilayer sachet. The dependent claims add conversion limits for T4-to-T3 degradation, defined stability conditions, a T4-to-glycerol concentration ratio, and a 5-to-250 microgram dose range. The patent is directed primarily to formulation and packaging control. It does not broadly cover every liquid levothyroxine product. Its practical strength depends on whether a competing product uses the claimed glycerol concentration, LDPE container, sachet architecture, dose range, and stability profile. What does U.S. Patent 10,537,538 cover?The independent claim requires all of the following elements:
The claim is cumulative. A product that omits one mandatory limitation may avoid literal infringement of claim 1, although the doctrine of equivalents could remain relevant in litigation. The claim does not expressly require a particular thyroid-hormone salt, manufacturing process, brand, indication, delivery device, or administration route. The technical language points to a liquid levothyroxine product, but infringement analysis would turn on the legally operative meaning of “T4 thyroid hormone” and the product’s formulation and packaging records. How broad is claim 1 of U.S. Patent 10,537,538?Claim 1 has meaningful formulation specificity and substantial packaging specificity. The principal narrowing limitations are the 85% glycerol vehicle and the LDPE container inside a sealed multilayer sachet. Formulation scopeThe phrase “consisting essentially of” is important. It generally permits components that do not materially alter the basic and novel characteristics of the claimed preparation, while potentially excluding excipients that materially affect stability or function. The claim therefore does not necessarily require a formulation containing only T4, glycerol, and water. The claimed vehicle is not any glycerol solution. It is an alcohol-free solution of 85% glycerol in water. A formulation containing 80% or 90% glycerol would not literally satisfy the stated 85% limitation unless the patent’s specification or claim-construction record gives the term a broader range. Claim 1 also permits T3 at less than 2.5%. The optional T3 language creates two covered formulation categories:
A product containing 2.5% or more T3 would fall outside that express limitation, subject to claim-construction and equivalents issues. Packaging scopeThe packaging limitations are central. The container must be:
A multidose bottle, glass ampule, prefilled syringe, unit-dose container made from a different plastic, or an LDPE container without the required sachet would present a stronger noninfringement position. The sachet limitation is broad in material selection because the claim lists numerous possible materials, including polyethylene, aluminum, polyethylene terephthalate, ionomer resins, paper, ethylene vinyl alcohol, copolymer resins, propylene, and fluorinated-chlorinated resins. The claim does not appear to require every listed material. It covers a laminate using a plurality of different materials selected from that group. What do claims 2 through 6 protect?Claims 2 through 6 add performance limitations based on T4 conversion to T3 during storage. These claims are narrower than claim 1 but potentially more valuable in a product dispute because they connect the composition and package to measurable stability results.
These are product claims with functional or performance language. A patentee would likely need analytical evidence showing that the accused product, in the claimed package, satisfies the specified storage result. A competing product could face testing disputes involving:
Claims 2 through 6 also create invalidity exposure if the stability thresholds were inherent in prior-art products or were not adequately enabled across the claim scope. Their commercial value is greater where the thresholds distinguish the claimed product from earlier liquid T4 formulations. What does claim 7 protect?Claim 7 requires a T4-to-glycerol weight ratio of approximately 4 to 400 parts per million. This limitation is technically important because it defines the active concentration relative to the principal vehicle rather than merely stating a T4 dose. At 85% glycerol, the ratio corresponds to a broad concentration window. The use of “about” introduces interpretive flexibility but also creates potential disputes over the acceptable boundaries. Claim 7 can capture products with different unit doses if the T4-to-glycerol ratio remains within the claimed range. A competitor could seek design-around opportunities by changing:
What does claim 8 protect?Claim 8 limits the single-dose unit to 5 to 250 micrograms of T4. This range encompasses common levothyroxine strengths, including many pediatric and adult doses. The claim is commercially relevant because standard thyroid-replacement products commonly use dose strengths within this window. Products above 250 micrograms per unit would fall outside claim 8 but could remain within claim 1 or other claims. The dose limitation does not require a particular dosing schedule or indication. It is a unit-dose limitation tied to the packaged preparation. What patents protect liquid T4 products?U.S. Patent 10,537,538 should be assessed as one part of a broader patent family and product estate. The relevant protection categories are:
Patent No. 10,537,538 is strongest against a product that reproduces the complete combination of formulation, unit-dose LDPE package, multilayer sachet, and claimed stability behavior. It is weaker against a liquid product using a bottle, glass container, syringe, different polyol, different glycerol concentration, or a materially different barrier package. When does U.S. Patent 10,537,538 lose exclusivity?The patent issued on February 18, 2020. Its exact expiration date depends on the earliest effective nonprovisional or international filing date, terminal disclaimers, and any patent-term adjustment. A 20-year term is calculated from the relevant earliest U.S. or PCT filing date under 35 U.S.C. §154. Patent-term adjustment may extend the nominal date, while a terminal disclaimer may shorten it. The patent should therefore be analyzed using the USPTO Patent Center term record rather than the issue date alone. Regulatory exclusivity for a related levothyroxine product is separate from the patent term and may expire earlier. FDA approval does not establish that all relevant patents are enforceable, and Orange Book listing does not guarantee validity. What is the Orange Book status of U.S. Patent 10,537,538?A patent is Orange Book-relevant only if it claims the approved drug, an approved method of using the drug, or an approved drug product formulation under FDA listing rules. Packaging claims may be listed where they claim the approved drug product or its formulation and packaging configuration. For a liquid levothyroxine product, the Orange Book analysis should distinguish:
If Patent No. 10,537,538 is listed for the relevant NDA, an ANDA applicant may need to submit a Paragraph IV certification or a section viii statement, depending on the listed claim and proposed labeling. If the patent is not listed, it may still be asserted under ordinary patent litigation, but it would not automatically trigger the Orange Book Paragraph IV framework. What Paragraph IV challenges could affect this patent?A generic applicant could challenge the patent on several grounds:
A Paragraph IV dispute would likely require confidential product information, including formulation composition, container resin, sachet structure, fill volume, and stability data. Public FDA materials alone generally do not establish infringement. Does biosimilar risk apply to Patent 10,537,538?Biosimilar risk does not materially apply. T4 thyroid hormone is a chemically defined small molecule, not a biologic regulated through the biosimilar pathway under the Public Health Service Act. The relevant competitive pathway is an ANDA for a generic levothyroxine product, a 505(b)(2) application for a differentiated formulation, or, in limited circumstances, a new NDA for a novel presentation. The main regulatory and patent risks involve pharmaceutical equivalence, bioequivalence, dose uniformity, stability, container closure performance, and labeling. Which companies could challenge the estate?Potential challengers would include manufacturers developing:
The principal competitive products in the U.S. thyroid market include tablet levothyroxine products from companies such as AbbVie, Viatris, Lannett, and other generic manufacturers, as well as liquid or capsule products associated with IBSA and other sponsors. Tablet manufacturers do not necessarily threaten Patent No. 10,537,538 because the claims are directed to a specific liquid preparation and package. What litigation or settlement agreements affect this patent?The supplied claims do not establish a litigation or settlement history. Patent litigation status must be determined from PACER, district-court dockets, PTAB records, FDA Paragraph IV notices, and the relevant NDA patent listing. A patent number alone does not show whether a generic challenge has been filed, whether a case settled, or whether a license exists. No licensing right can be inferred from assignment data. Ownership, exclusive licensing, commercialization rights, and litigation authority are separate questions. The relevant commercial parties may include the patent owner, an NDA sponsor, a U.S. commercialization partner, and a contract manufacturer. How strong is the patent estate for a liquid T4 product?The patent has moderate blocking strength against an exact or near-exact copy of the claimed presentation. Its strength is lower against formulation and packaging alternatives.
The patent’s commercial value is concentrated in the integrated product-and-package combination. A competitor that changes only the outer sachet may still face infringement risk if the sachet remains within the listed material architecture. A competitor that changes the container material and formulation may have a substantially stronger position. What generic launch scenarios exist?Scenario 1: Exact unit-dose liquid copyA generic reproducing the 85% glycerol formulation, LDPE container, sachet, dose range, and stability profile faces the highest infringement risk. A Paragraph IV certification and district-court litigation would be likely if the patent is Orange Book listed and unexpired. Scenario 2: Same active ingredient, bottle presentationA multidose bottle or a different container system may avoid the packaging limitations. The product would still require separate analysis against other formulation or stability patents. Scenario 3: Alternative vehicleA formulation using a different glycerol concentration, another polyol, or a materially different aqueous system could avoid literal infringement of claim 1. It would require independent regulatory and bioequivalence support. Scenario 4: Tablet or capsule launchA conventional solid oral levothyroxine product would generally fall outside the supplied claims. Its competitive effect would be commercial rather than directly infringing. What geographic coverage does the patent provide?U.S. Patent 10,537,538 provides enforceable rights in the United States and its territories covered by U.S. patent law. Parallel protection requires separate national or regional patents. The existence of corresponding applications in Europe or other jurisdictions does not establish that equivalent claims issued, remain in force, or cover the same package. For global freedom-to-operate work, the relevant comparison is by country:
Key Takeaways
FAQsIs a liquid levothyroxine bottle covered by U.S. Patent 10,537,538?Not necessarily. The supplied claims require a single-dose one-component LDPE container placed inside a sealed multilayer sachet. A bottle may fall outside those limitations, although other patents could apply. Does the patent cover levothyroxine sodium?The claims use the term T4 thyroid hormone and do not expressly state “levothyroxine sodium.” Whether a particular salt satisfies the claim depends on claim construction, the specification, prosecution history, and the product’s chemical form. Can a generic use the same 85% glycerol formulation in a glass ampule?That change may avoid the express LDPE-container limitation. The generic would still need to assess the sachet, single-dose, stability, ratio, and any other patent claims in the relevant estate. Are T4-to-T3 conversion limits regulatory requirements?They may be product-quality or stability specifications, but the claims make them patent limitations. FDA approval requirements and patent claim requirements are separate legal standards. Does an expired patent eliminate all market-entry risk?No. Market entry may remain subject to other formulation, packaging, manufacturing, method-of-use, trademark, regulatory exclusivity, or contractual restrictions. References
More… ↓ |
Drugs Protected by US Patent 10,537,538
| Applicant | Tradename | Generic Name | Dosage | NDA | Approval Date | TE | Type | RLD | RS | Patent No. | Patent Expiration | Product | Substance | Delist Req. | Patented / Exclusive Use | Submissiondate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ibsa | TIROSINT-SOL | levothyroxine sodium | SOLUTION;ORAL | 206977-001 | Dec 15, 2016 | RX | Yes | No | 10,537,538 | ⤷ Start Trial | Y | ⤷ Start Trial | ||||
| Ibsa | TIROSINT-SOL | levothyroxine sodium | SOLUTION;ORAL | 206977-002 | Dec 15, 2016 | RX | Yes | No | 10,537,538 | ⤷ Start Trial | Y | ⤷ Start Trial | ||||
| Ibsa | TIROSINT-SOL | levothyroxine sodium | SOLUTION;ORAL | 206977-013 | Jan 13, 2021 | RX | Yes | No | 10,537,538 | ⤷ Start Trial | Y | ⤷ Start Trial | ||||
| >Applicant | >Tradename | >Generic Name | >Dosage | >NDA | >Approval Date | >TE | >Type | >RLD | >RS | >Patent No. | >Patent Expiration | >Product | >Substance | >Delist Req. | >Patented / Exclusive Use | >Submissiondate |
Foreign Priority and PCT Information for Patent: 10,537,538
| Foriegn Application Priority Data | ||
| Foreign Country | Foreign Patent Number | Foreign Patent Date |
| 16194294 | Oct 18, 2016 | |
International Family Members for US Patent 10,537,538
| Country | Patent Number | Estimated Expiration | Supplementary Protection Certificate | SPC Country | SPC Expiration |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Canada | 3037808 | ⤷ Start Trial | |||
| China | 109789213 | ⤷ Start Trial | |||
| Denmark | 3528847 | ⤷ Start Trial | |||
| >Country | >Patent Number | >Estimated Expiration | >Supplementary Protection Certificate | >SPC Country | >SPC Expiration |
