|
Patent landscape, scope, and claims: |
United States Patent 6,815,458: Scope of Claims and US Patent Landscape for Monoamine (5‑HT2A) Receptor Inhibitors
US Patent 6,815,458 is a “Markush” style small-molecule estate covering a broad chemical genus (Formula (I)/(II)), selected exemplified analogs, and downstream use claims targeting inhibition of monoamine receptor activity, with repeated narrowing to serotonin receptors, particularly 5‑HT2A, and disease-condition treatment methods (including schizophrenia and migraine). The claim set is structured to support multiple infringement theories: product (compound) coverage, formulation coverage, and method-of-use coverage tied to receptor signaling and activation.
What is US Patent 6,815,458 (Scope overview) and what do the claims cover?
Featured snippet answer: The patent claims cover (1) a chemical genus of substituted acetamide/carbamide-like compounds containing an O (W = oxygen) linkage, (2) specific enumerated examples (claim 6), and (3) pharmaceutical use claims for inhibiting monoamine receptor activity with an emphasis on 5‑HT2A signaling/activation and treatment of conditions including schizophrenia and migraine (claims 13-48).
Claim architecture (what’s protected)
-
Compound claims (genus Markush)
- Claim 1: broad Formula (I) genus with constraints on:
- n = 1
- W = oxygen
- Variable linkers (X1, X2, Y1, Y2) that can include methylene/vinylene/ethylene bonds and heteroatom insertions (O, S, NH, N(lower alkyl), or bond)
- Aromatic substituents Ar1 and Ar2 with a restriction that they are not simultaneously unsubstituted phenyl
- A substituent R on the ring/position Z, allowing H, cyclic/acyclic alkyl-like groups, lower hydroxyalkyl, lower aminoalkyl, or aralkyl/heteroaralkyl
- Claims 2-4: narrower sub-genuses fixing preferred combinations of X/Y and Ar substitution patterns (e.g., phenyl substituted with lower alkyl, lower alkoxy, halogen).
-
Salt/anion variant claims
- Claim 5 and 11: Formula (II) variants specifying:
- RN = H, lower alkyl, aralkyl, or heteroaralkyl
- ArL and ArR limited to lower alkyl/lower alkoxy/halogen
- k = 1 or 2
- K = suitable anion, and N = suitable anion (depending on typographical variant in the claim text provided)
-
Selected exemplified compounds (hard list)
- Claim 6: a large, explicitly enumerated list of named analogs, repeatedly featuring motifs consistent with:
- a piperidine-4-yl core (often “piperidin-4-yl” or N-substituted piperidines),
- a para-methoxy phenyl acetamide / carbamide theme (“4‑methoxyphenylacetamide” and “phenylmethylcarbamide” appear repeatedly),
- and a second aryl/benzyl/heteroaryl substituent (methylbenzyl, phenethyl, bromobenzyl, thienylmethyl, etc.),
- plus variations on piperidine N-substituent (methyl, ethyl, tert-butyl, hydroxyethyl, cyclic alkyl, halophenylmethyl, heteroaryl methyl, etc.).
-
Pharmaceutical composition claims
- Claim 12: pharmaceutical composition with an effective amount of Formula (I) compound + a pharmaceutically acceptable diluent/excipient.
-
Method-of-use claims (receptor pharmacology)
- Claim 13: inhibiting monoamine receptor activity by contacting the receptor/system with one or more compounds of claim 1.
- Claims 14-16: receptor is serotonin receptor, specifically 5‑HT2A, and location in CNS/PNS.
- Claims 17-18: additional site coverage in blood cells or platelets, and for mutated or modified receptors.
- Claim 20-22: activity can be signaling, constitutive, and tied to serotonin receptor activation.
- Claims 23-27: inhibiting receptor activation, including activation by agonistic agents (exogenous or endogenous) and constitutive activation.
-
Treatment claims
- Claim 34: treating a disease condition associated with a monoamine receptor by administering a therapeutically effective amount.
- Claim 35: disease list includes schizophrenia, psychosis, migraine, hypertension, thrombosis, vasospasm, ischemia, depression, anxiety, sleep disorders, appetite disorders.
- Claims 39-44: serotonin receptor is 5‑HT2A and location/mutation qualifiers.
- Claims 45-48: specific indications:
- Schizophrenia (45)
- Migraine (46)
- Psychosis (47), including drug-induced psychosis (48)
Practical scope implications
- Genus breadth: The Markush variables for X1/X2/Y1/Y2 and Ar1/Ar2 can support infringement by both:
- “designed-around” analogs that still occupy the same structural relationship, and
- direct coverage of enumerated exemplars plus salts/prodrugs.
- Pharmacology breadth: The method claims do not require a specific disease mechanism beyond “associated with monoamine receptor,” then narrow to 5‑HT2A and signaling/activation states. This supports enforcement against clinical-labeled indications and receptor-targeted clinical protocols.
How broad is the chemical genus in claim 1 vs. the enumerated examples in claim 6?
Featured snippet answer: Claim 1 is broad across linkers (X1/X2/Y1/Y2), aromatic substitutions (Ar1/Ar2), and substituent R on Z, with a fixed oxygen linkage (W = oxygen) and n = 1. Claim 6 is a long, explicit list of specific piperidinyl acetamides/carbamides with varied N-substitutions and aryl substituents.
Genus constraints that likely matter most for freedom-to-operate
- Fixed oxygen linkage (W = oxygen): eliminates analogs with thio/other isosteres if W is essential to the claimed structure.
- n = 1: fixes ring assembly length or relative connectivity pattern.
- Ar1/Ar2 not simultaneously unsubstituted phenyl: prevents at least one fully unsubstituted scenario; still allows many mono-substituted phenyl/heteroaryl permutations.
- Linker allowance (X1/X2/Y1/Y2):
- X1 is methylene, vinylene, or N/N(lower alkyl).
- X2 depends on X1 choices, with allowances for methylene, bond, and heteroatoms O/S/N/N(lower alkyl).
- Y1 and Y2 similarly allow vinylene/ethylene/propylene and heteroatom insertion only in certain pairings.
- R substituent on Z: can be H, alkyl-like, hydroxyalkyl, aminoalkyl, or aralkyl/heteroaralkyl.
Enumerated examples act as anchor points
Claim 6 repeatedly identifies compound families that likely correspond to a specific lead series. The examples consistently include:
- “piperidin-4-yl” in the scaffold
- a 4‑methoxyphenylacetamide motif in many entries
- optional second substituent on the amide nitrogen and variable substituents on the piperidine nitrogen
For infringement mapping, a competitor’s candidate structures should be tested against:
- whether the scaffold retains the same relative placement of:
- the piperidine-4-yl nitrogen,
- the benzyl/aryl substituent at the amide nitrogen (as suggested by N-(...)-N-((4-methylphenyl)methyl)... patterns),
- and the 4‑methoxyphenyl group on the acetamide carbonyl-bearing aromatic ring.
Which structures are explicitly covered (claim 6 list) and how do they map to substituent “families”?
Featured snippet answer: Claim 6 enumerates dozens of analogs, most built on a piperidin‑4‑yl core paired with 4‑methoxyphenyl acetamide or phenylmethylcarbamide functionalities, varying the piperidine N-substituent (alkyl, cycloalkyl, hydroxyalkyl, heteroaryl/aryl methyl) and varying the amide N-substituent (benzyl/aryl/heteroaryl methyl).
Substituent families visible in claim 6 (grouping for landscape screening)
-
Piperidine N-substituent R (examples show: t‑Bu, pentyl/hexyl, cycloalkyl, hydroxyalkyl, phenylmethyl, heteroaryl methyl)
- Examples include “1-(1-methylethyl)piperidin-4-yl” (isopropyl),
- “1-pentylpiperidin-4-yl,” “1-hexylpiperidin-4-yl,”
- “1-cyclohexylpiperidin-4-yl,” “1-cyclopentylpiperidin-4-yl,” etc.
- “1-(2-hydroxyethyl)piperidin-4-yl,” “1-(3-hydroxypropyl)piperidin-4-yl”
- “1-(imidazol-2-ylmethyl)piperidin-4-yl,” “1-(2-bromophenyl)methylpiperidin-4-yl,” “1-(4-fluorophenyl)methyl...”
-
Amide N-substituent (benzyl/phenethyl/heteroaryl methyl; frequently with 4‑methylbenzyl or phenylmethyl)
- Patterns: “N-((4-methylphenyl)methyl)-...”
- Carbamide motif: “N′-phenylmethylcarbamide,” “N′-benzyl-carbamide,” “N′-phenethyl-carbamide”
-
Aryl ring variation on the acetamide/carbamide aromatic
- Repeated “4‑methoxyphenyl” and “2‑(4‑methoxyphenyl)” variations appear.
- Halogenated and heteroaryl-containing aromatic entries appear: fluoro, chloro, bromo, trifluoromethyl, thienyl, benzo[b]thienyl, oxadiazolyl, indolyl, triazolylmethyl, benzimidazolinone-propyl, quinazolinedion-ethyl, dioxolan-ethyl, etc.
Landscape implication: The enumerated list is not confined to a single SAR pocket. It indicates the original application treated the scaffold as a flexible receptor antagonist series with multiple tolerated aryl/heteroaryl substitutions.
What patents are in the neighborhood of US 6,815,458 (families, continuation risk, and landscape grouping)?
No portfolio-wide family mapping, priority data, or assignee/title linkages are provided in the prompt. Without those bibliographic and citation inputs, a complete US or global “who holds what” landscape for US 6,815,458 cannot be produced accurately.
Accordingly, this analysis is limited to claim-scope and enforcement-relevant categories expressed by the patent claims themselves. The practical impact is still clear: the estate should be evaluated as a compound + salt + composition + method-of-use bundle centered on 5‑HT2A inhibition and broad monoamine receptor modulation.
How strong is US 6,815,458 for enforcement: what claim types support infringement?
Featured snippet answer: Strength comes from overlap of (a) broad genus compound claims (1, 7, 10, 11), (b) enumerated example claims (6), (c) composition claims (12), and (d) receptor-targeted method claims tightly tied to 5‑HT2A signaling/activation and to treatment indications (34-48). This supports enforcement both on “making/using/selling” products and on “inducing” specific receptor-effect and clinical use contexts.
Enforcement theories implied by the claim set
- Direct infringement on product: If a commercial product contains a covered compound (Formula I/II) or a salt/prodrug thereof.
- Method-of-use infringement:
- contacting the receptor/system to inhibit monoamine receptor activity (13),
- with specified target as serotonin 5‑HT2A (14-15),
- with specified effect types (signaling constitutive, activation inhibition; 20-22, 23-27).
- Indication-based enforcement:
- schizophrenia and migraine methods explicitly claimed (45-46),
- psychosis including drug-induced psychosis (47-48),
- broader disease list (35) can support additional theories if labeling and evidence are aligned.
Gaps to watch (from claim language only)
- The claims require W = oxygen and the specified scaffold relationships; analogs replacing oxygen with sulfur or changing linker topology may fall outside.
- The Markush language is broad, but the exact structure definitions are constrained by the provided variables and pairings (e.g., how X2 depends on X1, how Y2 depends on Y1).
What generic entry risks exist if a company tries to develop a 5-HT2A monoamine inhibitor product?
Featured snippet answer: If a generic or new entrant uses a compound within Formula (I)/(II) scope (including listed examples) or its pharmaceutically acceptable salts/prodrugs, product-claims and composition-claims create a direct infringement risk. If the entrant runs clinical protocols or labels for 5‑HT2A inhibition or specifically administers for schizophrenia/migraine/psychosis, the method claims add a second, independent risk channel.
Practical risk triggers
- Structural risk trigger: marketed active ingredient or key metabolite/prodrug intermediate falls within claim 1/7 genus.
- Formulation risk trigger: product form is a pharmaceutical composition comprising a claimed compound and standard excipients (12).
- Clinical-use risk trigger: marketing or prescribing guidance supports method claim parameters:
- targeting 5‑HT2A inhibition (14-16, 28-31, 39-44),
- and indications enumerated in treatment claims (34-48).
Key Takeaways
- US 6,815,458 is a multi-layer estate: genus compound + enumerated exemplars + salts/prodrugs + composition + receptor pharmacology and disease treatment methods.
- The chemical scope is driven by Formula (I)/(II) with fixed W = oxygen and n = 1, plus constrained linker pairings (X1/X2, Y1/Y2) and aromatic restrictions on Ar1/Ar2.
- The examples in claim 6 anchor enforcement around a piperidin‑4‑yl scaffold paired with 4‑methoxyphenyl acetamide/carbamide motifs and wide N-substituent and aryl substitution freedom.
- Method-of-use claims strongly emphasize serotonin receptor 5‑HT2A, including signaling and activation states, and cover specific indications like schizophrenia, migraine, and psychosis (including drug-induced psychosis).
- Because the prompt does not supply bibliographic family data or citations, a full cross-patent landscape (other patents in the same family, continuation, divisionals, or citation neighbors) cannot be stated without risking inaccuracies.
FAQs
1) Does US 6,815,458 cover salts and prodrugs?
Yes. Claims 1 and related claims explicitly include “a pharmaceutically acceptable salt or prodrug thereof.”
2) What receptor subtype is most emphasized in the method claims?
The claims repeatedly narrow monoamine receptors to serotonin receptors, specifically 5‑HT2A.
3) Are disease indications limited to schizophrenia and migraine?
No. The patent has a broader disease-condition list (including schizophrenia, psychosis, migraine, depression, anxiety, sleep disorders, and appetite disorders) and then provides explicit methods for schizophrenia, migraine, and psychosis.
4) Do the claims cover both inhibiting receptor activity and inhibiting receptor activation?
Yes. Separate claim tracks cover inhibiting “activity” (13) and inhibiting “activation” (23), including activation by exogenous or endogenous agonists and constitutive activation.
5) Is the chemical scope restricted by an oxygen requirement?
Yes. The claims fix W = oxygen, which constrains isostere variants that replace oxygen with other atoms in the defined position.
References (APA)
- United States Patent No. 6,815,458.
More… ↓
⤷ Start Trial
|
