When will the ACETAMINOPHEN, CAFFEINE AND DIHYDROCODEINE BITARTRATE patents expire, and when will generic ACETAMINOPHEN, CAFFEINE AND DIHYDROCODEINE BITARTRATE be available?

Subscribe to access the full database, or Start Trial
Applicant	Tradename	Generic Name	Dosage	NDA	Approval Date	TE	Type	RLD	RS	Patent No.	Patent Expiration	Product	Substance	Delist Req.	Exclusivity Expiration
Pharmobedient	ACETAMINOPHEN, CAFFEINE AND DIHYDROCODEINE BITARTRATE	acetaminophen; caffeine; dihydrocodeine bitartrate	TABLET;ORAL	204209-001	Sep 30, 2016		DISCN	No	No	⤷ Start Trial	⤷ Start Trial				⤷ Start Trial
>Applicant	>Tradename	>Generic Name	>Dosage	>NDA	>Approval Date	>TE	>Type	>RLD	>RS	>Patent No.	>Patent Expiration	>Product	>Substance	>Delist Req.	>Exclusivity Expiration

Last updated: October 25, 2026

Acetaminophen, caffeine and dihydrocodeine bitartrate is a niche prescription opioid combination marketed in the United States under Trezix. The product contains acetaminophen 325 mg, caffeine 30 mg and dihydrocodeine bitartrate 16 mg per capsule. Its commercial position depends more on controlled-substance regulation, opioid prescribing restrictions, generic substitution and limited physician use than on patent protection.

Standalone product revenue is not publicly disclosed. The financial outlook is therefore best assessed through prescription volume, reimbursement, generic competition, opioid policy and market access rather than reported brand sales.

What is acetaminophen, caffeine and dihydrocodeine bitartrate?

The product combines three active ingredients:

Component	Function	Commercial role
Acetaminophen	Non-opioid analgesic	Provides baseline pain relief
Caffeine	Analgesic adjuvant	May enhance analgesic response and counter opioid-related sedation
Dihydrocodeine bitartrate	Opioid analgesic	Provides the controlled-substance component

The U.S. reference product, Trezix, is indicated for acute pain severe enough to require an opioid analgesic when alternative treatments are inadequate. The FDA label identifies the product as an opioid combination with risks of addiction, abuse, misuse, respiratory depression, neonatal opioid withdrawal and accidental exposure.[1]

Dihydrocodeine is metabolized in part to dihydromorphine and has opioid activity. The combination is positioned for short-duration treatment rather than chronic pain management.

What is the strength and dosage form?

The marketed U.S. dosage form is an oral capsule containing:

Ingredient	Amount per capsule
Acetaminophen	325 mg
Caffeine	30 mg
Dihydrocodeine bitartrate	16 mg

The acetaminophen content creates a cumulative-dose risk when patients use other acetaminophen-containing products. The FDA label warns against exceeding the total daily acetaminophen limit and against combining Trezix with other acetaminophen products without medical direction.[1]

What is the FDA regulatory status of Trezix?

Trezix was approved through an FDA new drug application, NDA 022204. The product is an immediate-release opioid combination and is subject to FDA opioid labeling, postmarketing surveillance and controlled-substance requirements.

Regulatory issue	Status
FDA pathway	NDA
U.S. product	Trezix
NDA	022204
Dosage form	Oral capsule
Controlled substance	Schedule III combination in the United States
Approval type	Prescription drug
Primary indication	Acute pain requiring an opioid
Biosimilar pathway	Not applicable
OTC status	Not applicable

Under the Controlled Substances Act, products containing no more than 90 mg of dihydrocodeine per dosage unit together with a non-narcotic active ingredient fall within Schedule III. Trezix contains 16 mg per capsule and is therefore regulated under the combination-product provisions rather than as a Schedule II single-ingredient opioid.[2]

The Schedule III classification supports prescription access but still imposes limits on refills, recordkeeping, dispensing and distribution. It does not eliminate the product’s opioid-related prescribing restrictions.

When does acetaminophen, caffeine and dihydrocodeine lose exclusivity?

The product’s meaningful U.S. regulatory exclusivity has expired. The active ingredients are established substances, and the product does not have the commercial profile of a recently launched novel molecular entity.

The practical protection profile is:

Protection category	Assessment
New chemical entity exclusivity	Not applicable to this established combination
Orphan exclusivity	Not applicable
Pediatric exclusivity	No material commercial relevance identified
Data exclusivity	Expired or not commercially significant
Composition-of-matter patent	Limited relevance because the active ingredients are established
Formulation patent	No publicly prominent barrier comparable to a modern extended-release opioid
Orange Book patent barrier	No major active patent barrier is publicly associated with Trezix as of June 2024
Generic substitution risk	High if an approved therapeutically equivalent product is available

FDA Orange Book protection for older combination products often depends on whether the sponsor has listed enforceable patents covering the formulation, method of use or drug product. In the case of this combination, regulatory exclusivity is not the principal commercial defense. The product is exposed to generic entry and therapeutic substitution.[3]

What patents protect acetaminophen, caffeine and dihydrocodeine bitartrate?

The patent estate appears weak relative to newer branded analgesics. The active ingredients themselves are long-established, and broad claims covering acetaminophen, caffeine and dihydrocodeine in a conventional immediate-release dosage form would face substantial validity and prior-art challenges.

Potential patent categories include:

Specific dosage ratios.
Capsule composition and excipient selection.
Manufacturing processes.
Stability and packaging.
Methods of treating acute pain.
Abuse-deterrent or modified-release delivery systems.

The commercial value of these categories is limited unless claims cover a non-obvious formulation with demonstrated clinical or manufacturing advantages. A conventional immediate-release capsule is generally easier for generic manufacturers to reproduce than an extended-release, abuse-deterrent or complex-device product.

Are there formulation patents?

No publicly prominent formulation patent appears to create a durable market barrier comparable to those associated with extended-release opioids, transdermal systems or abuse-deterrent technologies.

A formulation patent could still delay a competing product if it covers a narrow excipient system or manufacturing process. That protection would be vulnerable to design-around strategies, particularly where the active ingredient ratio and immediate-release performance can be replicated through alternative excipients.

Are there method-of-use patents?

Method-of-use claims for treating acute pain are unlikely to provide meaningful commercial exclusivity unless they cover a specific patient population, dosing protocol or clinically differentiated use. The principal product label uses a conventional acute-pain indication, which limits the strategic value of narrow method-of-use claims.

What is the Orange Book status of Trezix?

Trezix is associated with FDA NDA 022204. Its commercial exposure is driven primarily by the absence of a significant remaining exclusivity period rather than by a listed patent cliff.

Orange Book issue	Commercial implication
NDA listing	Confirms FDA-approved reference product status
Patent exclusivity	No prominent long-dated barrier identified
Therapeutic-equivalence risk	Depends on approved generic competition
Paragraph IV exposure	Potentially material if a generic applicant challenges any listed patent
30-month stay risk	Limited unless an enforceable listed patent is challenged
Substitution	Controlled by state pharmacy law, payer policy and available equivalents

A Paragraph IV filing would be commercially important only if a listed patent remained active and an applicant sought approval before its expiration. For an older immediate-release combination, an ANDA applicant could instead pursue a Paragraph III certification, a section viii carve-out for protected uses, or an ordinary certification if no relevant patent remained listed.

No major, publicly documented Paragraph IV campaign or high-value patent dispute involving Trezix had emerged through June 2024.

Which companies are challenging the product?

No major public litigation campaign against Trezix or its principal formulation was identified through June 2024. The competitive threat is more likely to arise from:

Generic combination products.
Single-ingredient dihydrocodeine alternatives.
Hydrocodone-acetaminophen products.
Oxycodone-acetaminophen products.
Tramadol-acetaminophen products.
Non-opioid analgesic regimens.
Retail and prescription acetaminophen-caffeine products.

The absence of a visible litigation campaign does not indicate strong market protection. It reflects the product’s modest revenue opportunity and the lower economic incentive to litigate compared with high-revenue branded drugs.

How does the product compare with competing analgesics?

Product category	Main advantage	Main disadvantage
Acetaminophen/caffeine/dihydrocodeine	Three-component analgesic formulation with moderate opioid potency	Limited market scale and opioid restrictions
Hydrocodone/acetaminophen	Broad physician familiarity and established prescribing patterns	Strong opioid scrutiny and acetaminophen toxicity risk
Oxycodone/acetaminophen	Greater analgesic potency	Higher abuse, dependence and respiratory-depression concerns
Tramadol/acetaminophen	Lower perceived opioid intensity	Variable efficacy and tramadol-specific seizure and serotonin risks
Acetaminophen alone	Low cost and broad access	Lower efficacy for severe acute pain
NSAIDs	Non-opioid option for inflammatory pain	Gastrointestinal, renal and cardiovascular risks

The product’s differentiation is narrow. Caffeine may improve the perceived efficacy of the combination, but it is unlikely to support a material price premium. Dihydrocodeine gives the product an opioid effect, but prescribing systems often favor more familiar alternatives.

What market dynamics affect demand?

Opioid stewardship is the largest demand constraint

FDA and CDC guidance has shifted prescribing toward the lowest effective opioid dose for the shortest practical duration. The CDC’s 2022 guideline emphasizes non-opioid therapies for many acute and chronic pain conditions and recommends careful reassessment when opioids are prescribed.[4]

This policy environment reduces the addressable market for all opioid combination products. A three-ingredient product can face additional prescribing friction because clinicians must manage both opioid exposure and total acetaminophen intake.

Generic substitution limits pricing power

Once a therapeutically equivalent generic becomes available, payers typically place the generic on preferred tiers. Pharmacy substitution and formulary controls can reduce brand volume even when the brand remains FDA-approved.

The product’s immediate-release dosage form is comparatively simple to manufacture. That reduces manufacturing barriers and makes price competition more likely than premium-brand expansion.

Supply-chain controls create operational friction

Manufacturers must comply with controlled-substance quota, security, inventory, reporting and distribution requirements. These obligations raise working-capital and compliance costs. They also reduce the number of manufacturers willing to enter the market, which can support intermittent pricing power but can create supply volatility.

International market structure is fragmented

Outside the United States, the product may be marketed under paracetamol rather than acetaminophen and under different trade names or national formulations. Dihydrocodeine scheduling varies by country. Some markets allow low-strength opioid combinations under pharmacy or restricted prescription systems, while others impose tighter controls.

The result is not a unified global market. Revenue depends on country-specific reimbursement, opioid regulation, product registration and local prescribing practice.

What is the financial trajectory for the drug?

No public company filing identifies material standalone revenue for acetaminophen, caffeine and dihydrocodeine bitartrate. The product is therefore unlikely to be a major driver of consolidated revenue for its manufacturer.

The most probable financial trajectory is mature-to-declining branded revenue with limited upside from niche demand.

Period	Likely financial pattern
Launch and early commercialization	Initial adoption based on formulation availability and prescriber familiarity
Mature branded period	Stable niche demand, limited volume growth and modest price support
Generic-entry period	Rapid erosion in brand volume and net price
Post-generic market	Low-margin, fragmented sales with periodic supply-driven pricing
Long term	Continued demand for selected acute-pain cases but declining strategic value

Revenue can remain stable for a period if generic competition is limited, distribution is concentrated or shortages affect competing opioids. Those factors do not create durable innovation value. They produce temporary supply-based pricing effects.

The principal financial risks are:

Declining opioid prescriptions.
Generic price erosion.
Payer exclusion.
Product discontinuation or supply interruption.
Regulatory changes affecting controlled substances.
Reputational and litigation exposure associated with opioid products.
Substitution by non-opioid therapies.

What generic launch scenarios exist?

Scenario 1: No immediate generic entrant

The brand retains niche prescriptions, particularly where physicians are familiar with the formulation and payers do not impose strong generic controls. Revenue declines gradually as overall opioid utilization falls.

Scenario 2: Single generic entrant

The generic captures a substantial share through lower acquisition cost and payer preference. The brand may retain a minority share through prescriber loyalty, supply reliability or contractual distribution.

Scenario 3: Multiple generic entrants

Net pricing falls sharply. The market becomes commodity-like, and commercial value shifts from brand promotion to manufacturing efficiency, wholesaler access and dependable controlled-substance supply.

Scenario 4: Therapeutic substitution

Even without a direct generic, physicians and payers shift patients toward hydrocodone combinations, tramadol products, NSAIDs or acetaminophen alone. This scenario can reduce demand without a formal ANDA launch.

What manufacturing and intellectual-property barriers exist?

Manufacturing barriers are moderate rather than high. A producer must demonstrate content uniformity, dissolution, stability, impurity control and bioequivalence. It must also maintain controlled-substance security and comply with DEA and FDA requirements.

The formulation does not appear to require a complex delivery device, sophisticated biologic manufacturing process or specialized sterile facility. That limits the defensibility of the product but lowers production complexity.

The most relevant barriers are operational:

Controlled-substance procurement and quota allocation.
FDA manufacturing compliance.
DEA registration and security.
Reliable supply of dihydrocodeine bitartrate.
Bioequivalence testing.
Distribution-channel access.
State-level prescription and substitution rules.

Is there biosimilar risk?

There is no biosimilar risk. Biosimilars apply to biologic products, while this product is a small-molecule oral combination. The relevant competitive pathway is generic approval through an ANDA or an equivalent national procedure outside the United States.

What patent litigation and licensing deals affect the product?

No major publicly disclosed licensing transaction or high-value patent settlement involving Trezix was identified through June 2024. No prominent patent litigation was driving the product’s market position.

The absence of licensing activity is consistent with the product’s limited exclusivity value. Commercial transactions, if any, are more likely to involve product rights, distribution arrangements or manufacturing supply than a valuable patent platform.

How strong is the patent estate?

The patent estate is weak to moderate in practical terms.

Factor	Assessment
Active ingredient novelty	Weak
Conventional combination protection	Weak
Immediate-release formulation complexity	Low
Manufacturing know-how	Moderate
Regulatory compliance barrier	Moderate
Controlled-substance distribution barrier	Moderate
Long-term exclusivity	Weak
Generic vulnerability	High

The product may retain commercial value as a supply-controlled niche medicine, but it does not appear to have the patent characteristics of a high-value specialty pharmaceutical.

Key Takeaways

The relevant U.S. product is Trezix, containing acetaminophen 325 mg, caffeine 30 mg and dihydrocodeine bitartrate 16 mg per capsule.
The product is an FDA-approved prescription opioid combination under NDA 022204.
Its U.S. regulatory exclusivity is mature, and no major long-dated patent barrier is publicly prominent.
Generic substitution, opioid stewardship and non-opioid alternatives are the main commercial threats.
Standalone revenue is not publicly disclosed and is unlikely to be material to a diversified pharmaceutical company.
The financial trajectory is mature-to-declining, with potential temporary support from limited competition or supply constraints.
No biosimilar pathway applies.
No major Paragraph IV campaign, patent settlement or licensing transaction was publicly driving the market through June 2024.
The product’s strongest barriers are controlled-substance compliance, supply reliability and distribution access rather than patents.

FAQs

Is acetaminophen, caffeine and dihydrocodeine bitartrate the same as Trezix?

In the United States, Trezix is the principal branded product associated with this specific three-ingredient formulation. The active-ingredient combination can also be described generically using acetaminophen rather than paracetamol.

Is dihydrocodeine more potent than codeine?

Dihydrocodeine has opioid activity and is generally treated as a stronger opioid analgesic than codeine on a milligram-for-milligram basis, although clinical potency depends on dose, patient tolerance, metabolism and treatment context.

Can a generic manufacturer copy Trezix?

A generic applicant may seek approval by demonstrating pharmaceutical equivalence and bioequivalence, subject to FDA requirements and any remaining enforceable patents. The immediate-release capsule format does not present the same technical barrier as a complex modified-release product.

Does caffeine create meaningful product differentiation?

Caffeine may enhance analgesic effects in some patients and can affect alertness, but it is unlikely to create durable patent or pricing differentiation in a mature opioid combination market.

What is the largest commercial risk to the product?

The largest risk is cumulative demand erosion from opioid-prescribing restrictions, generic substitution and replacement by non-opioid analgesics. Patent expiry is less important because the product is already a mature combination with limited apparent remaining exclusivity.

References

U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2024). Trezix: Prescribing information. FDA.
U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration. (2024). Controlled substances schedules. U.S. Department of Justice.
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2024). Approved drug products with therapeutic equivalence evaluations: Orange Book. FDA.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2022). CDC clinical practice guideline for prescribing opioids for pain: United States, 2022. MMWR Recommendations and Reports, 71(3), 1-95.

US Patents:	0
Applicants:	1
NDAs:	1
Raw Ingredient (Bulk) Api Vendors:	3
Patent Applications:	13
DailyMed Link:	ACETAMINOPHEN, CAFFEINE AND DIHYDROCODEINE BITARTRATE at DailyMed

AI Deep Research

Questions you can ask:

Summary for ACETAMINOPHEN, CAFFEINE AND DIHYDROCODEINE BITARTRATE