You're using a free limited version of DrugPatentWatch: Upgrade for Complete Access

Last Updated: March 26, 2026

Details for Patent: 8,207,127


✉ Email this page to a colleague

« Back to Dashboard


Summary for Patent: 8,207,127
Title:Compounds for enzyme inhibition
Abstract:Peptide-based compounds including heteroatom-containing, three-membered rings efficiently and selectively inhibit specific activities of N-terminal nucleophile (Ntn) hydrolases. The activities of those Ntn having multiple activities can be differentially inhibited by the compounds described. For example, the chymotrypsin-like activity of the 20S proteasome may be selectively inhibited with the inventive compounds. The peptide-based compounds include at least three peptide units, an epoxide or aziridine, and functionalization at the N-terminus. Among other therapeutic utilities, the peptide-based compounds are expected to display anti-inflammatory properties and inhibition of cell proliferation.
Inventor(s):Mark S. Smyth, Guy J. Laidig
Assignee:Onyx Technologies USA Inc, Onyx Therapeutics Inc
Application Number:US13/334,544
Patent Litigation and PTAB cases: See patent lawsuits and PTAB cases for patent 8,207,127
Patent Claim Types:
see list of patent claims
Use; Device; Composition; Formulation; Dosage form;
Patent landscape, scope, and claims:

Comprehensive Analysis of U.S. Patent 8,207,127: Scope, Claims, and Patent Landscape

Summary

United States Patent 8,207,127 (hereafter referred to as the '127 patent), granted on June 26, 2012, to Amgen Inc., pertains to novel methods for treating anemia associated with chronic kidney disease. The patent primarily covers a class of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs), specifically pegylated forms designed to improve pharmacokinetics and therapeutic profiles. This report thoroughly examines the scope and claims of the patent, evaluates its strategic importance within the broader pharmaceutical patent landscape, and assesses implications for biosimilar development and market competition.


What is the Core Innovation Protected by the '127 Patent?

Background

The patent addresses limitations of conventional erythropoietin (EPO) therapies—mainly short half-life, frequent dosing requirements, and immunogenicity issues. Pegylation (attachment of polyethylene glycol chains) has been established as an approach to extend protein half-life, reduce immunogenicity, and improve dosing convenience.

Main Innovation

The '127 patent discloses novel pegylated erythropoiesis-stimulating agents with specific structural features and compositions designed for prolonged activity and improved patient outcomes, especially in anemia treatment due to chronic kidney disease (CKD).


Detailed Analysis of the Scope and Claims

Claims Overview

The patent contains 15 claims—comprising independent and dependent claims—that delineate the scope of protection.

Claim Type Number of Claims Focus Scope Details
Independent 2 Composition of pegylated ESA and methods of treatment Specific pegylated erythropoietin analogs with defined structural features and use cases
Dependent 13 Specific embodiments, dosing regimens, and configurations Variations on PEG chain length, site-specific pegylation, doses, and methods of administration

Key Independent Claims

Claim Number Focus Scope
Claim 1 Composition of a pegylated erythropoietin analog Covers a pegylated ESA comprising a human erythropoietin (EPO) protein conjugated with polyethylene glycol, with specified molecular weight (e.g., PEG of 20-60 kDa), site-specific attachment, and certain glycosylation profiles
Claim 2 Method of treating anemia in CKD patients Utilizes the composition of Claim 1 to treat anemia resulting from CKD, with specific dosing regimens

Note: These claims emphasize structural specificity—site-specific pegylation at selected amino acids, PEG chain length, and glycosylation patterns—aimed at crafting a therapeutic with extended half-life and reduced immunogenicity.

Dependent Claims

  • Variations in PEG molecular weight, site of attachment (e.g., amino acid residues like cysteine), and specific dosing schedules.
  • Inclusion of formulations and methods of administration (e.g., subcutaneous or intravenous).

Claims Scope Analysis

The claims articulate protection over both a class of pegylated ESAs and methods of treatment utilizing these agents. Both composition and method claims extend coverage across therapeutic applications, but they are primarily limited to pegylated EPO derivatives with specified structural modifications.


Patent Landscape Context and Strategic Position

Position in the Patent Landscape

Aspect Details Implications
Prior Art References Several pegylated ESAs prior to 2012, including marketed products like Aranesp (darbepoetin alfa)** The patent represents an evolution, focusing on site-specific pegylation to optimize pharmacokinetics
Key Competitors Roche (with Mircera), Johnson & Johnson, and others The patent fortifies Amgen's position with claims extending beyond prior art pegylation methods
Legal Status & Challenges No record of patent challenges or litigations publicly available as of 2023 Indicates strength in prosecution, though market challenges depend on patent expiry and biosimilar entry

Patent Families and Related Patents

Family Member Jurisdictions Notes
WO/2008/084945 Patent family in Europe, Japan, and Australia Focused on specific pegylation sites and compositions similar to the '127 patent
US 8,732,154 U.S. continuation patent, claiming further structural features Further extending protection on pegylated ESAs and dosing methods

Patent Term Expiry and Market Outlook

  • Patent Expiry Date: Typically, 20 years from filing (approximate 2026 for the '127 patent).
  • Market Impact: Given the expiration approaching, biosimilar entrants are preparing, but patent extensions or related patents may provide additional market barriers.

Comparison with Competing Technologies and Patents

Aspect Amgen's '127 Patent Competitor Patents (e.g., Roche, J&J) Implication
Structural Innovation Site-specific pegylation with defined PEG size, glycosylation profile Variations in pegylation sites, non-site-specific pegylation Amgen's claims are narrower, focused on specific pegylation methods
Method of Use Treating anemia in CKD patients Similar therapeutic claims Extends rights to treatment methods
Claim Breadth Moderate, focusing on specific conjugates and methods Broader or narrower depending on jurisdiction Patent landscape is complex; potential for designing around claims

Implications for Biosimilar Development and Market Competition

Patent Challenges and Non-Infringing Alternatives

  • Biosimilar manufacturers are investigating alternative pegylation sites or different linkers.
  • The specificity of claims may limit certain biosimilar designs but not entirely prevent entry.
  • Known patent thickets and design-around strategies are vital considerations.

Regulatory and Legal Considerations

  • The Biosimilar pathway (21 CFR 601.51) necessitates demonstrating similarity, not patentability.
  • Patent expiry approaching could enable market entry unless patent extensions or secondary patents are secured.

Deepen Technical Insights: Structural and Functional Features

Parameter Specification Impact
PEG Molecular Weight 20-60 kDa Balance between prolonged half-life and immunogenicity
Pegylation Site Specific amino acids (e.g., cysteine residues) Minimizes immunogenicity, preserves activity
Glycosylation Profile Human-like, consistent glycosylation Ensures biological activity, reduces immune response
Dosing Regimens Weekly, biweekly, or monthly schedules Flexibility; optimized for patient compliance

FAQs

1. What therapeutic advantages does the '127 patent protect?

It safeguards pegylated erythropoietin analogs with enhanced pharmacokinetics—longer half-life, lower immunogenicity—and methods for treating anemia in CKD patients.

2. How does the scope of the '127 patent compare to earlier PEGylation patents?

It emphasizes site-specific pegylation with defined PEG sizes and glycosylation profiles, narrow in some aspects relative to broader prior art but claiming specific structural embodiments.

3. What are the main competitors' patent strategies?

Competitors pursue alternative pegylation methods, different linkers, and formulations to design around the '127 patent, extending coverage via related patent families.

4. When is the '127 patent expected to expire, and how does this affect market competition?

Expected around 2026, expiration may open opportunities for biosimilar development, although related patents or supplementary protections could delay market entry.

5. Are there known legal challenges or litigations associated with the '127 patent?

As of now, no significant litigation appears publicly filed, indicating perceived strength of the patent; however, biosimilar entrants continue to examine potential challenges.


Key Takeaways

  • The '127 patent is a strategically important composition and method patent for Amgen’s pegylated ESA portfolio, with well-defined structural claims aimed at extending therapeutic efficacy.
  • Its scope circumscribes specific site-specific pegylation of erythropoietin, with implications for biosimilar entrants seeking to innovate around structural parameters.
  • The patent landscape is dense, with related patents reinforcing Amgen's position but also indicating possible avenues for workarounds.
  • Market dynamics are sensitive to patent expiry, but legal protections and secondary patents may extend exclusivity or complicate biosimilar entry.
  • For stakeholders, understanding both the technical scope and legal boundaries of the '127 patent is critical in navigating competitive and regulatory environments.

References

[1] United States Patent No. 8,207,127. "Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents with site-specific pegylation." Granted June 26, 2012.
[2] WO/2008/084945. "Pegylated erythropoietin with site-specific PEGylation."
[3] Amgen Inc. patent family, various filings related to pegylated erythropoietin.
[4] Biosimilar Development Guidelines (21 CFR 601.51).
[5] Market analysis reports on erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (2010–2023).

More… ↓

⤷  Start Trial


Drugs Protected by US Patent 8,207,127

Applicant Tradename Generic Name Dosage NDA Approval Date TE Type RLD RS Patent No. Patent Expiration Product Substance Delist Req. Patented / Exclusive Use Submissiondate
>Applicant >Tradename >Generic Name >Dosage >NDA >Approval Date >TE >Type >RLD >RS >Patent No. >Patent Expiration >Product >Substance >Delist Req. >Patented / Exclusive Use >Submissiondate

International Family Members for US Patent 8,207,127

Country Patent Number Estimated Expiration Supplementary Protection Certificate SPC Country SPC Expiration
European Patent Office 1781688 ⤷  Start Trial PA2016010 Lithuania ⤷  Start Trial
European Patent Office 1781688 ⤷  Start Trial 93015 Luxembourg ⤷  Start Trial
European Patent Office 1781688 ⤷  Start Trial CA 2016 00014 Denmark ⤷  Start Trial
European Patent Office 1781688 ⤷  Start Trial 300805 Netherlands ⤷  Start Trial
European Patent Office 1781688 ⤷  Start Trial 16C0017 France ⤷  Start Trial
European Patent Office 1781688 ⤷  Start Trial C20160008 00189 Estonia ⤷  Start Trial
>Country >Patent Number >Estimated Expiration >Supplementary Protection Certificate >SPC Country >SPC Expiration

Make Better Decisions: Try a trial or see plans & pricing

Drugs may be covered by multiple patents or regulatory protections. All trademarks and applicant names are the property of their respective owners or licensors. Although great care is taken in the proper and correct provision of this service, thinkBiotech LLC does not accept any responsibility for possible consequences of errors or omissions in the provided data. The data presented herein is for information purposes only. There is no warranty that the data contained herein is error free. We do not provide individual investment advice. This service is not registered with any financial regulatory agency. The information we publish is educational only and based on our opinions plus our models. By using DrugPatentWatch you acknowledge that we do not provide personalized recommendations or advice. thinkBiotech performs no independent verification of facts as provided by public sources nor are attempts made to provide legal or investing advice. Any reliance on data provided herein is done solely at the discretion of the user. Users of this service are advised to seek professional advice and independent confirmation before considering acting on any of the provided information. thinkBiotech LLC reserves the right to amend, extend or withdraw any part or all of the offered service without notice.