When will the patents on DAYPRO expire, and when will DAYPRO go generic?

Sponsor	Phase
Sanford Research	Early Phase 1

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
Pfizer	DAYPRO	oxaprozin	TABLET;ORAL	018841-004	Oct 29, 1992	AB	RX	Yes	Yes	⤷ Start Trial	⤷ Start Trial				⤷ Start Trial
Pfizer	DAYPRO ALTA	oxaprozin potassium	TABLET;ORAL	020776-001	Oct 17, 2002		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: June 12, 2026

DAYPRO (oxaprozin) Market Dynamics and Financial Trajectory: Sales, Competition, and Patent/Generic Pressures

DAYPRO (oxaprozin), an older oral NSAID, has remained a niche prescription product since generic entry in the mid-2010s, with revenue driven mainly by legacy prescriber retention, payer positioning, and low-cost generic substitution. The financial trajectory is constrained by (1) extensive generic availability for oxaprozin tablets, (2) limited differentiation versus other NSAIDs, (3) ongoing erosion of brand pricing power, and (4) typical NSAID cycle forces including formulary churn and step therapy.

The rest of this report maps the competitive market structure and provides a decision-grade framework for estimating brand revenue exposure and future dynamics.

How has DAYPRO’s market evolved after generic oxaprozin entry?

Core dynamic: Once oxaprozin generics achieved wide coverage, DAYPRO’s brand demand shifted from “brand pricing” to “brand presence,” with residual pull coming from prescriber familiarity, patient switching frictions, and limited utilization niches (coverage exceptions, tablet-strength targeting, and specific tolerability histories).

Generic substitution impact on NSAID brand economics

Pricing pressure: Generic NSAIDs compress realized prices quickly after formulary acceptance.
Volume elasticity: Patients and prescribers typically accept generics for class-standard indications (osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis) when efficacy expectations are similar across NSAIDs.
Payer behavior: Pharmacy benefit managers typically place generics at the lowest copay tier; brand survival depends on limited contracting margins or pharmacy conversion patterns.

Likely market structure for oxaprozin

Single active ingredient: Oxaprozin tablets face direct substitution across generic manufacturers.
Multiple competitor NSAIDs: Even without direct brand replacement, prescribers can move between NSAID options based on formulary status and adverse event profiles.

What competitor NSAIDs pressure DAYPRO’s prescribing and pricing?

In practical formularies, DAYPRO competes with other NSAIDs that offer payer-preferred status, differential dosing, or different tolerability perceptions (GI risk management, CV risk perceptions, and renal tolerability).

Common NSAID competitors (class-level)

Ibuprofen (various strengths, OTC and Rx)
Naproxen (including extended-release)
Diclofenac (including enteric-coated and topical)
Meloxicam
Celecoxib (COX-2 selective class channeling on some formularies)
Indomethacin and ketoprofen (less prominent on payer preferred lists but available)

What changes the “winner” in real formularies

Formulary tiering and PA rules for high-cost NSAIDs or COX-2 selective agents.
Step edits for trial of preferred NSAIDs prior to brand or less-preferred agents.
Safety protocol usage patterns, such as limiting NSAID duration, age-based edits, and concomitant therapy considerations.

When does generic oxaprozin fully erode DAYPRO revenue?

Featured-snippet style answer: DAYPRO’s revenue erosion typically accelerates after (1) broad payer adoption of oxaprozin generics, (2) sustained lowest-tier pharmacy conversion, and (3) diminished brand contracting leverage.

Exclusivity and patent-driven brand protection

For DAYPRO specifically, the practical business outcome is that generic oxaprozin tablets removed most brand pricing power. Brand trajectory after that point follows typical NSAID patterns:

Rapid margin compression after first meaningful generic share.
Slower continuing decline as multi-source generics expand and pharmacy conversion stabilizes.
Residual brand stability only where plan-specific contracting delays or patient preference exists.

What is the Orange Book status of DAYPRO, and how does it affect commercial durability?

Featured-snippet style answer: DAYPRO’s durability depends on whether any active Orange Book-protected barriers persist for tablets or specific dosage strengths, including formulation, manufacturing, and method-of-use claims. Once generics list for immediate-release oxaprozin tablets at strength coverage levels, brand durability usually becomes primarily a payer-contract and patient-habituation question.

Orange Book impact pathways

Entry barriers on strength-specific listings: If some strengths have fewer protected barriers, competitors can target those.
Formulation vs. API protection: If only API is unprotected, brand loses unless formulation-specific protections persist.
Method-of-use claims: Less common for older NSAIDs in tablet form, but if present they can delay some generics for specific claims.

Note: Exact Orange Book listing counts, patent numbers, and expiration dates are not included here because this response does not have the required listing-level inputs.

What patent estate typically protects older NSAIDs like oxaprozin, and how strong is it commercially?

Commercially relevant protections for an older oral NSAID usually fall into three buckets:

API compound claims (often expired for long-running NSAIDs)
Formulation claims (tablet composition, coatings, release characteristics)
Method-of-use claims (clinical regimens, dosing limitations, or patient subsets)

Strength assessment for business planning

For a legacy NSAID like oxaprozin:

Compound exclusivity is usually exhausted, shifting the brand to “formulation and process” relevance.
Formulation protection can still matter only if generics require design-around or have to omit certain features for specific strengths.
Method-of-use barriers rarely prevent generic entry across all indication labels.

The commercial “strength” of such an estate generally correlates to whether generics can market at the same label and dosage strengths without successful litigation or design-around work.

Note: This section describes the typical legal architecture but does not list DAYPRO’s specific patent numbers because those facts are not supplied in the input.

What Paragraph IV challenges could affect DAYPRO timelines?

Business impact rule: Paragraph IV is relevant only if a generic applicant challenges an Orange Book-listed patent. Once oxaprozin has generic multi-source availability, subsequent Paragraph IV filings usually do not reset market dynamics unless they block a large strength coverage set or require a stay.

How Paragraph IV affects revenue

60-month stay risk: If timely and eligible, it can delay entry for the challenged patent list.
Settlement agreements: Often convert into agreed entry dates or market-sharing rules.
Favorable court decisions: Clear the way for broader generic coverage and accelerate erosion.

Note: No litigation timeline or generic applicant information is included because the input does not contain DAYPRO-specific case details.

What litigation and settlements have shaped oxaprozin brand exposure?

Commercially relevant litigation variables

Whether any litigation delayed generic entry into key strengths
Whether settlements imposed carve-outs or delayed nonchallenged strengths
Whether injunctions or consent decrees changed label positioning

Note: This response does not enumerate specific DAYPRO or oxaprozin dockets, dates, or settlement terms because the prompt does not include the necessary case-level inputs.

What is the FDA regulatory status for DAYPRO and generic oxaprozin tablets?

DAYPRO is an oral solid NSAID. The FDA regulatory status relevant to market dynamics is whether generics have:

ANDAs approved for immediate-release oxaprozin tablets at each covered strength, and
Labeling equivalence that supports substitution and pharmacy conversion.

Featured-snippet style answer: For a legacy NSAID where multiple ANDAs are approved, the regulatory barrier becomes minimal for new entrants, and competition becomes primarily price and formulary management.

Payer and pharmacy adoption mechanics

Formulary placement: Generics occupy lowest tiers.
Switch incentives: Pharmacy conversion programs and electronic prescribing defaults move patients to generics.
Therapeutic interchange policies: OTC access for some NSAIDs increases substitution behavior in general practice.

How does DAYPRO compare financially with other branded NSAIDs?

Comparison logic (what matters)

Branded NSAIDs survive when they have: (1) protected formulations, (2) favorable access contracts, (3) differentiated dosing forms (for example, topical or extended release), or (4) distinct clinical positioning.
DAYPRO’s core differentiation is historically limited once generics are fully available.

What typically differentiates “survivor” NSAID brands

Sustained patent-protected delivery system
Higher payer barriers for alternatives
Co-packaging and brand-specific patient programs (limited for older products)

Without a current protective barrier, DAYPRO behaves like a “legacy brand with generic substitution,” unlike brands with active exclusivity or distinct delivery/IP.

How many patents cover DAYPRO dosing strengths and what barriers exist by dosage form?

Business relevance: The number of active patents listed for each dosage strength determines whether generics can launch universally or must wait for strength-specific clearances.

Note: This response does not provide an actual patent count or strength-by-strength barrier map because the underlying Orange Book listing dataset is not included in the input.

What generic entry risks still exist for oxaprozin tablets?

For oxaprozin tablets, the remaining “entry risks” are usually not about API access but about:

manufacturing compliance and quality submissions,
labeling alignment that may prompt fewer substitution frictions, and
residual patent or exclusivity for specific strengths if any protection persists.

Because the product is older, the dominant risk is not a delay but continued price compression through additional multi-source competition.

What is DAYPRO’s revenue exposure and profit trajectory under current market dynamics?

Practical revenue trajectory expectation: A legacy NSAID brand’s revenue typically transitions from:

brand-led sales with contracting leverage to
minor residual share with shrinking gross margin as rebates and conversion costs rise.

Business drivers to watch in quarters

Net sales decline pace versus competitors’ pricing
Gross margin after increased rebate load to maintain shelf
Share changes by strength where generics vary in acquisition cost
Payer formulary movement away from older NSAIDs toward preferred alternatives

Note: No numeric revenue or EPS guidance is included because the prompt does not supply sales figures, segment reporting, or database extracts.

Key Takeaways

DAYPRO’s market dynamics are dominated by generic oxaprozin tablet substitution and class-level NSAID competition.
Brand financial trajectory is constrained by limited differentiation once generics achieve broad coverage.
Remaining commercial value is typically tied to payer contracting mechanics and residual prescriber and patient retention, not to ongoing exclusivity.
Patent and regulatory barriers would matter only if there are still-active Orange Book listings by strength, but those facts are not provided in the input.
Competitive erosion is expected to remain price-led and formulary-led, consistent with older oral NSAID market structure.

FAQs

1) Is DAYPRO still a brand or is it primarily a generic market product?

DAYPRO remains a brand product, but its commercial position is heavily influenced by the availability and formulary preference of generic oxaprozin tablets.

2) Do oxaprozin generics compete head-to-head with DAYPRO on the same dosage strengths?

Yes, where ANDA approvals exist for equivalent immediate-release oxaprozin tablet strengths, they compete directly through substitution.

3) Does switching from DAYPRO to other NSAIDs reduce payer resistance?

Often yes, because payer plans commonly steer to their preferred NSAID tiers, and many alternatives are low cost.

4) Can any patent still delay future generic entries for oxaprozin tablets?

Only if there are still-active Orange Book-listed patents or exclusivity tied to specific strengths, formulations, or method-of-use claims, which would require strength-level listing evidence.

5) What factors most influence remaining demand for legacy NSAID brands like DAYPRO?

Formulary tier placement, pharmacy conversion programs, prescriber inertia, patient tolerability history, and contract terms that affect net price.

References (APA)

FDA Orange Book: Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (Accessed via FDA Orange Book database).

US Patents:	0
Applicants:	1
NDAs:	2
Raw Ingredient (Bulk) Api Vendors:	91
Clinical Trials:	1
Patent Applications:	4,817
Drug Prices:	Drug price information for DAYPRO
What excipients (inactive ingredients) are in DAYPRO?	DAYPRO excipients list
DailyMed Link:	DAYPRO at DailyMed

DAYPRO Drug Patent Profile

Which patents cover Daypro, and when can generic versions of Daypro launch?

AI Deep Research

Questions you can ask:

Summary for DAYPRO

Recent Clinical Trials for DAYPRO

US Patents and Regulatory Information for DAYPRO