ROSIGLITAZONE MALEATE Drug Patent Profile
Which patents cover Rosiglitazone Maleate, and what generic alternatives are available?
Rosiglitazone Maleate is a drug marketed by Ani Pharms, Teva Pharms Usa, and Teva. and is included in three NDAs.
The generic ingredient in ROSIGLITAZONE MALEATE is metformin hydrochloride; rosiglitazone maleate. There are three drug master file entries for this compound. Additional details are available on the metformin hydrochloride; rosiglitazone maleate profile page.
AI Deep Research
Questions you can ask:
- What is the 5 year forecast for ROSIGLITAZONE MALEATE?
- What are the global sales for ROSIGLITAZONE MALEATE?
- What is Average Wholesale Price for ROSIGLITAZONE MALEATE?
Summary for ROSIGLITAZONE MALEATE
| US Patents: | 0 |
| Applicants: | 3 |
| NDAs: | 3 |
| Raw Ingredient (Bulk) Api Vendors: | 68 |
| Clinical Trials: | 22 |
| Patent Applications: | 3,497 |
| DailyMed Link: | ROSIGLITAZONE MALEATE at DailyMed |
Recent Clinical Trials for ROSIGLITAZONE MALEATE
Identify potential brand extensions & 505(b)(2) entrants
| Sponsor | Phase |
|---|---|
| Cetero Research, San Antonio | Phase 1 |
| Mutual Pharmaceutical Company, Inc. | Phase 1 |
| GlaxoSmithKline | Phase 1 |
Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) Classes for ROSIGLITAZONE MALEATE
US Patents and Regulatory Information for ROSIGLITAZONE MALEATE
Rosiglitazone Maleate Market Dynamics, Patent Expiry, Litigation, and Financial Trajectory
Rosiglitazone maleate is a mature thiazolidinedione for type 2 diabetes. Its commercial trajectory changed from blockbuster growth to rapid market contraction after cardiovascular-safety concerns emerged in 2007. GlaxoSmithKline’s Avandia franchise generated roughly $2 billion or more in annual global sales at its peak, but sales fell sharply after regulatory restrictions, negative publicity, product-liability litigation, and competition from newer diabetes therapies. U.S. composition-of-matter protection expired in 2012, leaving a generic market with limited revenue potential. FDA restrictions were removed in 2015, but the decision did not restore branded demand.
What is the current market position of rosiglitazone maleate?
Rosiglitazone maleate is a low-growth, legacy small-molecule product with limited commercial value.
The active ingredient is rosiglitazone, marketed initially by GlaxoSmithKline as Avandia. It is a peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma, or PPAR-gamma, agonist that improves insulin sensitivity. The drug was approved by the FDA in 1999 for type 2 diabetes, either as monotherapy or in combination with other glucose-lowering agents.
Its market position is defined by four factors:
- U.S. patent expiry and generic entry.
- Cardiovascular-safety concerns associated with myocardial infarction risk.
- Removal of Avandia from routine prescribing after 2010 restrictions.
- Substitution by metformin, DPP-4 inhibitors, GLP-1 receptor agonists, SGLT2 inhibitors, and insulin therapies.
Rosiglitazone remains an FDA-approved active ingredient, but it is no longer a major branded diabetes franchise. Generic products may remain available in the United States and other markets, although prescription volume is substantially below the product’s pre-2007 level.
How did Avandia sales change over time?
Avandia sales peaked before the cardiovascular-safety controversy and then declined rapidly.
| Period | Commercial event | Market effect |
|---|---|---|
| 1999 | FDA approval of Avandia | Entry as a new insulin-sensitizing therapy |
| 2001-2006 | Expansion of monotherapy and combination use | Rapid revenue growth |
| 2006 | Peak commercial period | Global sales reached approximately $2 billion or more |
| 2007 | Meta-analysis raised myocardial-infarction concerns | Prescribing and new-patient starts declined |
| 2010 | FDA imposed major prescribing restrictions | U.S. demand contracted sharply |
| 2011-2012 | Generic rosiglitazone products entered or approached entry | Brand pricing and exclusivity weakened |
| 2013 | FDA modified restrictions after review of the RECORD trial | Regulatory access improved, but commercial recovery did not occur |
| 2015 | FDA removed the special risk-evaluation and mitigation strategy | Administrative barriers fell; market demand remained limited |
| 2020s | Mature generic market | No meaningful branded growth driver |
GSK reported Avandia sales of approximately £1.2 billion in 2006, followed by a steep decline in subsequent years. The revenue collapse reflected lower prescribing, safety-related litigation, formulary pressure, and the arrival of competing therapies. GSK no longer reports rosiglitazone as a significant standalone growth product in its current portfolio disclosures. [1][2]
What was the peak revenue exposure?
The peak exposure was concentrated in the Avandia brand and related combination products:
- Avandia: rosiglitazone tablets.
- Avandamet: rosiglitazone/metformin.
- Avandaryl: rosiglitazone/glimepiride.
The franchise generated several billion dollars cumulatively before generic competition and regulatory restrictions. Its revenue profile differed from newer diabetes products because it had limited lifecycle protection after the safety controversy and did not retain a durable premium position once alternative mechanisms became available.
Standalone current revenue is not publicly disclosed by GSK. The economic value of rosiglitazone today is primarily associated with low-priced generic volume, not brand royalties or a protected specialty market.
When did rosiglitazone lose exclusivity?
U.S. market exclusivity effectively ended after expiry of the core rosiglitazone patent estate in the early 2010s. The key commercial loss occurred around 2012, when generic rosiglitazone products became available or commercially viable in the U.S. market.
| Protection category | Approximate status |
|---|---|
| New chemical entity exclusivity | Expired long before the current market period |
| Core composition-of-matter patent | Expired in or around 2012, subject to patent-term calculations and extensions |
| Formulation and combination patents | Some later-dated rights existed, but they did not preserve a high-value branded market |
| Method-of-use patents | Potentially relevant to specific diabetes-treatment uses, but generally weak against broad generic substitution |
| Pediatric extension | Any extension did not create a durable post-2012 commercial barrier |
| Current U.S. exclusivity | No meaningful branded exclusivity remains |
The precise legal position depends on the product, dosage strength, formulation, and jurisdiction. The FDA Orange Book is the controlling source for listed U.S. patents and regulatory exclusivity. [3]
What patents protect rosiglitazone maleate?
The original patent estate covered the thiazolidinedione compound and pharmaceutical uses. Later rights covered particular formulations, combinations, and treatment methods.
Composition-of-matter protection
The commercial core was protection for rosiglitazone and related thiazolidinedione compounds. Composition-of-matter protection is generally the strongest patent category because it can block manufacture and sale of the active ingredient itself.
That protection expired before the current decade. Once the core compound patent barrier fell, generic manufacturers could compete using abbreviated new drug applications, subject to regulatory requirements and any remaining listed patents.
Formulation patents
Rosiglitazone tablets are conventional oral solid dosage forms. Formulation patents did not create the type of durable barrier associated with extended-release injectables, complex inhalation products, drug-device combinations, or biologics.
Potential formulation claims included:
- Tablet composition.
- Stability and excipient selection.
- Combination tablets with metformin.
- Combination tablets with glimepiride.
- Dosing and administration characteristics.
These rights had less commercial leverage because physicians could prescribe generic rosiglitazone tablets and separate combination medicines. A formulation patent could affect a particular product but would not necessarily protect the active ingredient market as a whole.
Method-of-use patents
Method-of-use rights could cover treatment of type 2 diabetes, combination therapy, or patient populations. Their practical value was limited by:
- Narrow claim scope.
- Physician prescribing practices.
- Generic labeling strategies.
- The ability of generic manufacturers to pursue “skinny-label” approaches where legally available.
- Low demand for rosiglitazone relative to competing therapies.
Method-of-use claims can support Paragraph IV litigation, but they did not preserve Avandia’s pre-2007 commercial position.
What is the Orange Book status of rosiglitazone?
Rosiglitazone has been listed in FDA-approved products, including Avandia and combination products. The commercial significance of Orange Book listings declined after expiry of the principal compound protection and the loss of branded demand.
The Orange Book is relevant for:
- Identifying approved rosiglitazone products.
- Reviewing listed patents.
- Evaluating expiration dates and pediatric extensions.
- Assessing whether a generic applicant must address listed patents.
- Tracking reference-listed drugs and approved dosage forms.
The relevant products include rosiglitazone tablets and combination products containing rosiglitazone with metformin or glimepiride. Current commercial availability can differ from formal approval status because a product may remain approved while being discontinued, withdrawn from sale, or distributed only in limited channels. [3]
Which companies challenged rosiglitazone patents?
Generic-drug companies, including major U.S. abbreviated new drug application sponsors, had commercial incentives to challenge or work around remaining Avandia patents after the core patent estate approached expiry.
The main legal routes were:
- Paragraph IV certification asserting that a listed patent was invalid, unenforceable, or not infringed.
- Paragraph III certification accepting delayed approval until patent expiry.
- Label carve-outs for patented methods of use.
- Generic entry after expiration of the core compound patent.
Public records do not support treating rosiglitazone as an active, high-value Paragraph IV battleground today. The principal commercial dispute moved from patent exclusivity to regulatory access, product liability, and declining clinical demand.
What patent litigation affected Avandia?
Avandia’s most consequential legal exposure was product-liability litigation, not a continuing patent battle.
Product-liability litigation
Thousands of lawsuits alleged that rosiglitazone increased the risk of heart attack, stroke, heart failure, or death and that GSK inadequately warned patients and physicians. GSK entered a large settlement in 2013 covering many U.S. claims while denying wrongdoing. The company continued to face additional claims and government scrutiny. [4]
Regulatory litigation and enforcement
The FDA’s restrictions and communications created commercial pressure without requiring a finding that Avandia was unapproved. FDA retained the product on the market while limiting access and requiring additional risk controls. In 2013, the agency revised the restrictions after reviewing updated evidence, including the RECORD trial. [5]
Patent litigation
Patent disputes existed around generic entry and listed patents, but patent litigation did not become the primary determinant of current rosiglitazone economics. The product’s commercial decline was driven mainly by safety perception, physician substitution, regulatory restrictions, and therapeutic competition.
What is the FDA regulatory status of rosiglitazone?
Rosiglitazone remains an FDA-approved diabetes therapy, but its regulatory history is unusually restrictive.
| FDA milestone | Date | Effect |
|---|---|---|
| Initial Avandia approval | 1999 | Approved for type 2 diabetes |
| Cardiovascular-risk concerns emerge | 2007 | FDA added warnings and required further review |
| Major access restrictions | 2010 | Use limited to selected patients and prescribers |
| Restrictions modified | 2013 | FDA relied partly on updated RECORD data |
| REMS removed | 2015 | Special distribution and certification requirements ended |
The FDA’s 2013 decision concluded that the available evidence did not support continuing the most restrictive access controls. In 2015, FDA removed the REMS requirements, including prescriber and pharmacy certification elements. The removal improved formal access but did not reverse the drug’s commercial deterioration. [5][6]
What happened in Europe?
European regulators suspended rosiglitazone marketing authorization in 2010 after reviewing cardiovascular-risk data. The European market therefore experienced a more severe regulatory contraction than the United States. This reduced the value of any European brand recovery strategy and weakened the commercial case for investment in additional rosiglitazone formulations. [7]
Does rosiglitazone have biosimilar risk?
No. Rosiglitazone is a synthetic small molecule, not a biologic. It is subject to generic-drug competition rather than biosimilar competition.
The relevant competitive risks are:
- ANDA-based generic entry.
- Therapeutic substitution.
- Combination-product substitution.
- Low-cost metformin and pioglitazone use.
- Prescription migration to GLP-1 and SGLT2 products.
The absence of biosimilar risk does not improve the outlook. Generic competition is usually more direct and more price destructive for a conventional oral small molecule.
How does rosiglitazone compare with competing diabetes drugs?
Rosiglitazone has a weaker current commercial position than most major modern diabetes classes.
| Therapy | Mechanism | Current commercial position versus rosiglitazone |
|---|---|---|
| Metformin | Reduces hepatic glucose production | Lower-cost first-line standard |
| Pioglitazone | PPAR-gamma agonist | Same broad class, generally stronger market persistence |
| DPP-4 inhibitors | Incretin pathway modulation | Better tolerated by many patients and widely used |
| GLP-1 receptor agonists | Glucose control and weight reduction | Stronger growth and premium pricing |
| SGLT2 inhibitors | Renal glucose excretion | Cardiovascular and renal outcome advantages |
| Insulin | Direct hormone replacement | Essential for many advanced cases |
| Rosiglitazone | PPAR-gamma agonist | Low-cost legacy option with safety-related prescribing constraints |
Pioglitazone remains the closest pharmacologic comparator. Both drugs improve insulin sensitivity, but pioglitazone has had broader long-term market survival. Rosiglitazone’s cardiovascular controversy created a durable prescribing disadvantage even after FDA restrictions were relaxed.
What licensing deals affected rosiglitazone?
Rosiglitazone was developed and commercialized within the GlaxoSmithKline corporate structure following the formation of GSK from Glaxo Wellcome and SmithKline Beecham. The product was not primarily dependent on a current external licensing deal comparable to a partnered oncology or biologic asset.
No material current licensing economics are publicly associated with rosiglitazone. Any historical development, regional distribution, or generic commercialization arrangements do not change the product’s current low-value market profile.
What generic launch scenarios exist for rosiglitazone?
Three generic-market scenarios are commercially relevant.
Scenario 1: Stable low-volume generic market
Generic rosiglitazone remains available for a small population of physicians and patients who value low cost or prior response. Prices remain compressed, and manufacturers compete mainly on supply reliability.
Scenario 2: Further market contraction
Physicians continue switching patients to pioglitazone, GLP-1 receptor agonists, SGLT2 inhibitors, or other therapies. Rosiglitazone volume declines until only limited legacy demand remains.
Scenario 3: Localized price opportunity
A manufacturer could obtain short-term value through supply shortages, regional distribution rights, or a combination product. This would be a supply-driven opportunity rather than an innovation-based franchise.
A branded relaunch would face substantial barriers: weak prescriber confidence, unfavorable product history, generic substitution, limited differentiation, and competition from drugs with cardiovascular, renal, or weight-loss benefits.
How strong is the rosiglitazone patent estate?
The estate is weak for current commercial purposes.
| Strength factor | Assessment |
|---|---|
| Core compound protection | Expired |
| Generic blocking power | Low |
| Formulation differentiation | Limited |
| Method-of-use value | Narrow and difficult to enforce commercially |
| Regulatory exclusivity | Expired |
| Brand premium | Minimal |
| Litigation leverage | Low compared with active specialty products |
| Manufacturing barrier | Low for conventional tablets |
| Geographic protection | Uneven and largely expired |
Manufacturing is not a major barrier. Rosiglitazone maleate is a conventional synthetic active pharmaceutical ingredient and oral tablet product. A manufacturer with appropriate API controls, tablet manufacturing capacity, quality systems, and regulatory approvals can generally compete without specialized delivery technology.
What revenue exposure remains for investors and manufacturers?
The remaining revenue exposure is modest and concentrated in generic supply.
For GSK, rosiglitazone is no longer a material growth or valuation driver. The principal financial effects are historical:
- Lost Avandia revenue.
- Litigation settlements and defense costs.
- Regulatory and compliance costs.
- Brand impairment and portfolio reprioritization.
- Reduced contribution from combination products.
For generic manufacturers, the opportunity is volume-based and price-sensitive. Margin potential depends on manufacturing scale, channel access, product availability, and the number of active suppliers. A new entrant would not have a strong basis for premium pricing absent a shortage or a narrowly protected formulation.
Key Takeaways
- Rosiglitazone maleate is a mature generic diabetes product with limited current commercial value.
- Avandia reached peak global sales of roughly $2 billion or more before the 2007 cardiovascular-safety controversy.
- Core U.S. patent protection expired around 2012, and no meaningful branded exclusivity remains.
- FDA removed the special Avandia REMS in 2015, but regulatory normalization did not restore demand.
- The principal legal exposure was product liability, not current patent litigation.
- Rosiglitazone is a small molecule and faces generic, not biosimilar, competition.
- Pioglitazone, GLP-1 receptor agonists, SGLT2 inhibitors, DPP-4 inhibitors, and metformin have stronger current market positions.
- Manufacturing and formulation barriers are low for conventional rosiglitazone tablets.
- Current revenue potential is limited to low-cost generic supply, regional availability, or temporary shortage-driven pricing.
FAQs
Is rosiglitazone maleate still sold in the United States?
Yes. FDA approval and commercial availability are separate issues. Rosiglitazone products may remain approved or available through generic channels even though Avandia is no longer a major branded product.
Can a company launch a new rosiglitazone formulation?
Potentially, but a new formulation would need a meaningful clinical, dosing, adherence, or safety advantage. A conventional tablet would face immediate generic and therapeutic competition.
Why did rosiglitazone sales collapse after FDA restrictions were lifted?
The product lost prescriber confidence, patient demand, brand equity, and reimbursement preference. Competing therapies also offered newer outcome data and differentiated benefits, particularly for cardiovascular, renal, and weight-related endpoints.
Does rosiglitazone have a remaining pediatric exclusivity period?
No commercially meaningful pediatric exclusivity remains. Any historic pediatric extension would not restore current market exclusivity.
Is rosiglitazone a viable target for pharmaceutical licensing?
Only in narrow circumstances, such as a regional generic supply agreement, shortage response, or low-cost portfolio acquisition. It is not an attractive conventional innovation-license target because the compound patent, brand premium, and major regulatory exclusivities have expired.
References
- GlaxoSmithKline. (2007). Annual report 2006. GlaxoSmithKline plc.
- GlaxoSmithKline. (2011). Annual report 2010. GlaxoSmithKline plc.
- U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (n.d.). Approved drug products with therapeutic equivalence evaluations: The Orange Book.
- U.S. Department of Justice. (2012). GlaxoSmithKline to pay $3 billion to resolve fraud allegations and failure to report safety data.
- U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2013). FDA drug safety communication: FDA requires removal of some prescribing and dispensing restrictions for rosiglitazone medicines.
- U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2015). FDA eliminates Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy for rosiglitazone-containing diabetes medicines.
- European Medicines Agency. (2010). European Medicines Agency recommends suspension of Avandia, Avandamet and Avaglim.
- Nissen, S. E., & Wolski, K. (2007). Effect of rosiglitazone on the risk of myocardial infarction and death from cardiovascular causes. New England Journal of Medicine, 356(24), 2457-2471.
- Home, P. D., Pocock, S. J., Beck-Nielsen, H., et al. (2009). Rosiglitazone evaluated for cardiovascular outcomes in oral agent combination therapy for type 2 diabetes. The Lancet, 373(9681), 2125-2135.
More… ↓
