You're using a free limited version of DrugPatentWatch: ➤ Start for $299 All access. No Commitment.

Last Updated: December 12, 2025

Physiological Effect: Decreased Mitosis


✉ Email this page to a colleague

« Back to Dashboard


Drugs with Physiological Effect: Decreased Mitosis

Applicant Tradename Generic Name Dosage NDA Approval Date TE Type RLD RS Patent No. Patent Expiration Product Substance Delist Req. Exclusivity Expiration
Padagis Us PODOFILOX podofilox GEL;TOPICAL 211871-001 Nov 22, 2023 AB RX No No ⤷  Get Started Free ⤷  Get Started Free ⤷  Get Started Free
Padagis Us PODOFILOX podofilox SOLUTION;TOPICAL 075600-001 Jan 29, 2002 AT RX No No ⤷  Get Started Free ⤷  Get Started Free ⤷  Get Started Free
Sigmapharm Labs Llc GRISEOFULVIN,ULTRAMICROSIZE griseofulvin, ultramicrosize TABLET;ORAL 202545-001 Oct 22, 2012 AB RX No No ⤷  Get Started Free ⤷  Get Started Free ⤷  Get Started Free
>Applicant >Tradename >Generic Name >Dosage >NDA >Approval Date >TE >Type >RLD >RS >Patent No. >Patent Expiration >Product >Substance >Delist Req. >Exclusivity Expiration

Market Dynamics and Patent Landscape for Drugs Targeting Decreased Mitosis

Last updated: July 30, 2025


Introduction

The pharmaceutical landscape for drugs that induce decreased mitosis, primarily aiming to inhibit cell proliferation, remains a crucial segment within oncology therapeutics. These agents are designed to arrest abnormal cell division, proving especially vital in cancer treatment where unchecked mitosis underpins tumor growth. Understanding the market dynamics and patent landscape of such drugs offers strategic insights for stakeholders from pharmaceutical companies to investors.


Market Overview and Drivers

The global oncology drug market is experiencing robust growth, attributed to increasing cancer incidences worldwide, compounded by aging populations and lifestyle factors [1]. Drugs with the physiological effect of decreased mitosis are central in chemotherapeutic regimens, particularly in treating solid tumors and hematological malignancies.

Key drivers include:

  • Rising Cancer Incidence: The World Health Organization reports approximately 19.3 million new cancer cases globally in 2020, with projections exceeding 28 million by 2040 [2]. This surge sustains demand for mitosis-inhibiting agents.

  • Advancements in Targeted Therapy: The shift from nonspecific chemotherapeutics to targeted agents enhances efficacy and reduces adverse effects, reinforcing the market for drugs that precisely inhibit mitotic processes [3].

  • Regulatory Approvals and Investments: Accelerated approval pathways, coupled with increased R&D investments, bolster the pipeline and commercialization of anti-mitotic drugs.

  • Combination Therapies: Integration of anti-mitotic drugs with immunotherapies and targeted agents enhances treatment outcomes, fostering market expansion.


Types of Drugs with Decreased Mitosis Effect

The class predominantly includes:

  • Microtubule Inhibitors: Such as taxanes (paclitaxel, docetaxel), which interfere with microtubule dynamics essential for mitosis.

  • Mitotic Kinase Inhibitors: Agents targeting Aurora kinases, Polo-like kinases (PLKs), and Nek kinases, pivotal in mitotic progression.

  • Spindle Assembly Checkpoint Modulators: Compounds disrupting proper chromosome segregation.

Emerging therapies focus on selective inhibitors that minimize toxicity, addressing limitations of traditional chemotherapeutics.


Patent Landscape Analysis

The patent landscape for anti-mitotic agents reveals extensive activity, reflecting both innovation and competitive dynamics.

Patent Filing Trends

Patent filings for drugs targeting decreased mitosis have surged, especially post-2010, aligning with the rise of targeted therapies. For example, patents for Aurora kinase inhibitors have increased significantly since 2008, signaling active R&D in this domain [4].

Key Patent Holders

Major pharmaceutical players dominate patent filings:

  • Abbvie and Pfizer hold foundational patents on microtubule stabilizers and inhibitors.

  • Merck and Eli Lilly have filed numerous patents on novel kinase inhibitors, including selective Aurora and PLK inhibitors.

  • Emerging biotech firms are increasingly filing for innovative compounds, often focusing on allosteric inhibitors or combination delivery mechanisms.

Patent Expiry and Lifecycle Management

Several foundational patents on first-generation microtubule inhibitors expired between 2015 and 2022, opening opportunities for biosimilars and generics. Firms are actively pursuing patent extensions through method of use, formulation, and combination patents.

Recent Innovations

Recent filings underscore efforts to improve selectivity and reduce toxicity, with patents on conjugates, nanocarrier formulations, and combination therapies. Notably, some patents target novel spindle assembly checkpoint inhibitors, indicating diversification in therapeutic targets.


Competitive Landscape and Market Access

The competition remains intense, with blockbuster drugs like Paclitaxel and Docetaxel facing biosimilar threats following patent expiries. Innovative compounds, such as Aurora kinase inhibitors (e.g., Alisertib), are positioned for niche approvals, often for refractory cancers.

Market access is further shaped by:

  • Pricing dynamics: High R&D costs and patent exclusivity influence pricing strategies.

  • Regulatory pathway complexities: Combined with patent strategies, they determine market entry timelines.

  • Biosimilar proliferation: Post-patent expiration, biosimilars erode market share, urging companies to innovate continually.


Challenges and Opportunities

Challenges

  • Toxicity and Side Effects: Traditional anti-mitotics like taxanes exhibit neurotoxicity, limiting dosing.
  • Drug Resistance: Tumors often develop resistance, reducing long-term efficacy.
  • Patent Cliffs: Expiring patents threaten profitability, necessitating pipeline renewal.

Opportunities

  • Precision Medicine: Biomarker-driven patient selection can optimize efficacy.
  • Novel Targets: Developing drugs targeting spindle assembly checkpoint proteins or mitotic kinases holds promise.
  • Combination Regimens: Synergistic therapies can improve outcomes and counter resistance.

Regulatory and Market Outlook

Regulatory agencies continue to facilitate approvals for targeted anti-mitotic agents, especially those with improved safety profiles. The rising adoption of companion diagnostics is aiding in personalized approaches, helping to circumvent some challenges associated with toxicity and resistance.

The forecast indicates a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of approximately 7% for the anti-mitotic drugs segment over the next five years, driven by pipeline advancements and expanding indications [5].


Key Takeaways

  • The segment of drugs decreasing mitosis remains vital amid a global rise in cancer incidence.
  • Patent activity is concentrated among large pharmaceutics, but innovation is accelerating in targeted kinase inhibitors.
  • Patent expiries are prompting industry shifts towards novel, more selective agents.
  • Challenges such as toxicity, resistance, and patent cliffs require strategic R&D investment.
  • Personalized medicine and combination therapies are key opportunities for sustained market growth.

FAQs

1. What are the primary drug classes targeting decreased mitosis?
Microtubule stabilizers/inhibitors (e.g., taxanes), mitotic kinases inhibitors (Aurora, PLK), and spindle assembly checkpoint modulators.

2. How does the patent landscape influence drug development in this sector?
Active patents incentivize innovation, but expired or soon-to-expire patents create opportunities for biosimilars, prompting companies to develop next-generation agents.

3. What are the main challenges faced by drugs inhibiting mitosis?
Toxicity (neurotoxic effects), drug resistance, and limited selectivity pose significant barriers.

4. Are there emerging targets within the decreased mitosis pathway?
Yes. Novel targets include Aurora kinase isoforms, Polo-like kinases, and spindle assembly checkpoint proteins, offering avenues for new therapies.

5. How might the market evolve with the advent of personalized cancer therapy?
Biomarker-driven selection enhances drug efficacy, supports regulatory approvals, and encourages tailored combination regimens, fostering sustainable growth.


References

  1. Globocan. (2020). Global Cancer Statistics 2020.
  2. WHO. (2021). Cancer Fact Sheet.
  3. Hargreaves, D. et al. (2018). Targeted therapies in oncology. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.
  4. Patentscope. (2022). Patent filing trends in anti-mitotic agents.
  5. MarketsandMarkets. (2023). Oncology Drugs Market Forecast.

More… ↓

⤷  Get Started Free

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.