TRIAVIL 4-50 Drug Patent Profile

« Back to Dashboard

Which patents cover Triavil 4-50, and when can generic versions of Triavil 4-50 launch?

Triavil 4-50 is a drug marketed by New River and is included in one NDA.

The generic ingredient in TRIAVIL 4-50 is amitriptyline hydrochloride; perphenazine. There is one drug master file entry for this compound. One supplier is listed for this compound. Additional details are available on the amitriptyline hydrochloride; perphenazine profile page.

Summary for TRIAVIL 4-50

US Patents:	0
Applicants:	1
NDAs:	1
Raw Ingredient (Bulk) Api Vendors:	1
Patent Applications:	22
DailyMed Link:	TRIAVIL 4-50 at DailyMed

US Patents and Regulatory Information for TRIAVIL 4-50

Applicant	Tradename	Generic Name	Dosage	NDA	Approval Date	TE	Type	RLD	RS	Patent No.	Patent Expiration	Product	Substance	Delist Req.	Exclusivity Expiration
New River	TRIAVIL 4-50	amitriptyline hydrochloride; perphenazine	TABLET;ORAL	014715-006	Approved Prior to Jan 1, 1982		DISCN	No	No

Expired US Patents for TRIAVIL 4-50

Applicant	Tradename	Generic Name	Dosage	NDA	Approval Date	Patent No.	Patent Expiration
New River	TRIAVIL 4-50	amitriptyline hydrochloride; perphenazine	TABLET;ORAL	014715-006	Approved Prior to Jan 1, 1982

Triavil 4-50 Market Dynamics and Financial Trajectory

Last updated: October 22, 2026

Triavil 4-50 is the fixed-dose combination of perphenazine 4 mg and amitriptyline hydrochloride 50 mg. Its commercial trajectory is that of an older, largely discontinued branded psychiatric product replaced by low-cost generic tablets. Public sources do not disclose product-level revenue, current market share, or a reliable standalone valuation. The commercial opportunity is therefore limited to residual generic demand, niche prescribing, and possible supply from specialty or unbranded manufacturers.

What is Triavil 4-50?

Triavil 4-50 contains:

Attribute	Detail
Active ingredients	Perphenazine 4 mg and amitriptyline hydrochloride 50 mg
Drug classes	Typical antipsychotic and tricyclic antidepressant
Dosage form	Oral tablet
Historical therapeutic use	Depressive symptoms associated with anxiety, agitation, or severe behavioral symptoms
Current commercial status	Historical brand with generic-equivalent availability or residual supply depending on jurisdiction
Main substitutes	Separate amitriptyline and perphenazine tablets, newer antidepressants, atypical antipsychotics, and other combination regimens

The product combines a phenothiazine antipsychotic with a tricyclic antidepressant. Its original clinical rationale was treatment of depression accompanied by marked anxiety, agitation, or psychotic symptoms. The same combination creates a narrower modern market because clinicians can titrate the two ingredients independently and select newer agents with more favorable tolerability profiles.

When did Triavil 4-50 lose exclusivity?

Triavil is a legacy small-molecule product whose core market exclusivity expired many years ago. The product predates the modern pharmaceutical patent environment, and no commercially meaningful patent barrier is generally associated with the 4 mg/50 mg combination today.

The relevant exclusivity erosion occurred through several channels:

1. Expiration of any original composition or product patents.
2. Availability of generic perphenazine and amitriptyline products.
3. Clinical substitution by selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, atypical antipsychotics, and separately dosed regimens.
4. Decline in branded promotion and distribution.
5. Reduced use of fixed-dose psychiatric combinations in favor of individually adjusted therapy.

Triavil 4-50 does not have the exclusivity profile of a protected branded antidepressant, antipsychotic, long-acting injectable, or biologic. It has no meaningful remaining U.S. market exclusivity period based on its historical product profile.

What is the FDA regulatory status of Triavil 4-50?

Triavil is a legacy FDA-approved combination product, but its branded commercial status is materially different from its historical approval status. A product may remain listed in FDA records while no longer being actively marketed by the original sponsor.

The practical regulatory position is:

Regulatory issue	Assessment
FDA approval history	Historical approval for the fixed-dose combination
Current branded promotion	Limited or absent
NDA-based commercial protection	No current commercial significance
Generic pathway	Abbreviated New Drug Application pathway is the relevant route for equivalent products
Biosimilar pathway	Not applicable
Prescription status	Prescription-only
Current prescribing relevance	Niche and substantially reduced versus newer therapies

FDA labeling for the combination warns of adverse effects associated with both ingredients, including sedation, anticholinergic effects, orthostatic hypotension, extrapyramidal symptoms, tardive dyskinesia, cardiovascular effects, and risks associated with tricyclic antidepressants and phenothiazines. These warnings increase the regulatory and commercial burden relative to newer treatment options (U.S. Food and Drug Administration, n.d.-a).

What is the Orange Book status of Triavil 4-50?

The Orange Book remains the central source for identifying listed patents, exclusivity, and therapeutic-equivalence information for approved prescription drugs. For a legacy combination such as Triavil, the principal commercial conclusion is that Orange Book-listed patent protection is not a current barrier to generic competition.

The market does not depend on a live patent estate covering:

• The perphenazine 4 mg and amitriptyline 50 mg composition.
• The oral tablet dosage form.
• The historical indication.
• Conventional manufacturing of the two active ingredients.
• Standard generic versions of the combination.

Any historical Orange Book entries or discontinued NDA records would have limited commercial value unless linked to an actively marketed product, an enforceable patent, and a viable launch strategy. Those conditions do not characterize Triavil 4-50.

How many patents cover Triavil 4-50?

No commercially relevant active patent estate is apparent for the historical 4 mg/50 mg combination. The product's economic position is not based on patent exclusivity.

Potential patent categories are theoretically available for any pharmaceutical product, including:

• New crystalline or polymorphic forms.
• Modified-release formulations.
• Abuse-deterrent delivery systems.
• Manufacturing processes.
• New therapeutic uses.
• Combination regimens involving a third active ingredient.

No such modern patent category is known to create a meaningful barrier around the traditional Triavil 4-50 tablet. A party attempting to revive the product would need to create a genuinely differentiated formulation or clinical use and obtain enforceable claims. Merely relaunching the historical tablet would not generate meaningful patent protection.

What formulations are protected by Triavil patents?

The commercially relevant historical formulation is an immediate-release tablet containing 4 mg of perphenazine and 50 mg of amitriptyline hydrochloride. There is no evident high-value formulation platform comparable to extended-release delivery, depot injection, transdermal delivery, abuse deterrence, or multiparticulate technology.

The absence of formulation differentiation has two effects:

• Generic manufacturers can compete primarily on price and supply reliability.
• A new entrant has limited scope to justify a premium without a new clinical, adherence, pharmacokinetic, or safety benefit.

A fixed-dose combination can provide convenience, but it also restricts dose flexibility. Patients who need a different balance of antidepressant and antipsychotic therapy may require separate products.

What are the main market dynamics for Triavil 4-50?

The market is shaped by substitution rather than expansion. Key dynamics include the following.

Generic price pressure

Perphenazine and amitriptyline are mature generic molecules. Manufacturing technology is established, active pharmaceutical ingredients are widely available, and no patent premium supports branded pricing. Pricing is therefore exposed to generic competition, wholesaler negotiations, pharmacy substitution, and periodic supply shortages.

Therapeutic substitution

Clinicians have broad alternatives. Amitriptyline remains used for depression, neuropathic pain, migraine prevention, and sleep-related indications, although tolerability limits use in some patients. Perphenazine remains a lower-cost typical antipsychotic, but atypical antipsychotics are more commonly considered in many treatment settings.

Safety-driven prescribing changes

The combination carries adverse-effect risks from both components. Anticholinergic burden, sedation, weight and metabolic considerations, extrapyramidal symptoms, orthostatic hypotension, and cardiac risks can make newer or separately titrated regimens more attractive.

Shrinking branded demand

The product lacks the commercial infrastructure associated with an actively promoted branded medicine. Prescribing is likely concentrated among clinicians familiar with older psychiatric regimens, patients stabilized on legacy therapy, and markets where low-cost generic combinations remain available.

Supply fragmentation

Legacy products can experience intermittent availability because manufacturers may discontinue low-volume strengths, consolidate product portfolios, or rely on a small number of active suppliers. For pharmacies, supply continuity may matter more than brand preference.

What is the financial trajectory of Triavil 4-50?

Triavil's financial trajectory is best characterized as a transition from historical branded revenue to low-value generic or residual revenue.

Period	Commercial condition	Financial implication
Original launch and growth	Branded fixed-dose psychiatric product	Revenue supported by brand recognition and limited competition
Generic-entry period	Equivalent products enter the market	Price and volume pressure increase
Mature generic period	Multiple low-cost alternatives	Revenue shifts toward manufacturing efficiency and supply reliability
Current market	Limited branded relevance and niche demand	Low product-level revenue and limited pricing power

No public company reporting appears to isolate Triavil 4-50 revenue. Financial statements from pharmaceutical companies generally aggregate mature generics into broader portfolios. Prescription databases may also combine the product with generic perphenazine/amitriptyline transactions or report insufficient volume for stable estimates.

A defensible valuation should therefore use bottom-up assumptions rather than historical brand sales. The principal variables are:

• Annual prescription volume.
• Number of active manufacturers.
• Average selling price by channel.
• Product availability by strength.
• Pharmacy reimbursement.
• Cost of active ingredients and tableting.
• Regulatory maintenance costs.
• Return and chargeback rates.
• Distribution concentration.

The product is unlikely to support significant standalone commercial investment unless a manufacturer has a broader strategy involving psychiatric generics, institutional channels, or a reformulated product.

Which companies are challenging Triavil 4-50?

The commercial challenge comes from generic manufacturers and therapeutic substitutes rather than a high-profile patent challenger. A conventional Paragraph IV litigation strategy would have little obvious economic rationale because the historical product does not present a valuable, unexpired patent estate.

Competitive pressure comes from:

• Generic manufacturers supplying the fixed-dose combination.
• Manufacturers selling amitriptyline and perphenazine separately.
• Branded and generic atypical antipsychotics.
• Newer antidepressants.
• Compounded formulations where legally and commercially appropriate.
• Hospital and managed-care formularies favoring low-cost alternatives.

The absence of a major Paragraph IV dispute is itself commercially significant. It indicates that the product does not offer the exclusivity value that typically attracts large generic litigation programs.

What patent litigation affects Triavil 4-50?

No major current patent litigation is associated with the historical Triavil 4-50 product. Litigation risk is more likely to arise from ordinary commercial matters:

• Trademark disputes over legacy brand names.
• Manufacturing or supply agreements.
• Product liability claims.
• False labeling or advertising allegations.
• Distribution and pharmacy reimbursement disputes.
• Regulatory enforcement involving labeling or manufacturing quality.

Patent litigation would become relevant only if a company introduced a new formulation, delivery system, or patented method of use. That would be a new product strategy rather than a continuation of the traditional Triavil tablet.

Are there biosimilar risks for Triavil 4-50?

Biosimilar risk is not applicable. Triavil is a chemically synthesized small-molecule combination, not a biologic. Its competitive risks are generic substitution and therapeutic substitution.

The relevant regulatory concepts are ANDA approval, pharmaceutical equivalence, bioequivalence, therapeutic equivalence, and state-level substitution rules. A biosimilar cannot compete with this product because biosimilars address biologic reference products under a different statutory pathway.

What generic launch scenarios exist for Triavil 4-50?

Three scenarios define the market.

Scenario 1: Continued low-volume generic supply

Existing manufacturers maintain limited production. Prices remain low, and demand comes from stable patients and prescribers who continue using the combination.

Scenario 2: Manufacturer withdrawal

One or more suppliers discontinue the strength because of weak margins, quality costs, or low demand. Shortages or intermittent availability push pharmacies toward separate amitriptyline and perphenazine products.

Scenario 3: Specialty relaunch

A manufacturer or specialty distributor relaunches the product under a generic or legacy brand strategy. Commercial success would depend on reliable supply, reimbursement, and channel access. A premium price would be difficult to sustain without a new formulation or clinical benefit.

How does Triavil 4-50 compare with separate amitriptyline and perphenazine?

Factor	Triavil 4-50	Separate products
Dosing convenience	Higher	Lower
Dose flexibility	Lower	Higher
Generic availability	Potentially limited by strength	Generally broader
Price	Low, if available	Usually low
Clinical titration	Fixed ratio	Independent
Formulation differentiation	Minimal	Not applicable
Supply resilience	Dependent on combination-product suppliers	Usually stronger
Commercial potential	Niche	Broader ingredient-level demand

Separate products generally have the stronger long-term commercial position because they can address more indications and permit independent dose adjustment. The fixed-dose combination retains value for patients who are stable on the exact ratio and prefer a single tablet.

What is the geographic coverage of Triavil 4-50?

The brand's historical commercial significance is primarily associated with the U.S. market, but availability of the same or similar perphenazine-amitriptyline combinations varies by country. Regulatory status, brand ownership, generic registration, and reimbursement differ across jurisdictions.

A geographic expansion strategy would face several constraints:

• Local approval requirements for fixed-dose combinations.
• Country-specific psychiatric labeling.
• Different treatment guidelines.
• Limited demand for older antipsychotic-antidepressant combinations.
• Price controls and reference pricing.
• Pharmacovigilance obligations.
• Local manufacturing or supply requirements.

International revenue should not be inferred from U.S. historical brand recognition.

What manufacturing and intellectual-property barriers exist?

Manufacturing barriers are modest but not zero. The active ingredients are established, yet a manufacturer still must demonstrate consistent assay, dissolution, content uniformity, stability, impurity control, and bioequivalence. Combination tablets can create formulation and analytical challenges because the two active ingredients have different physicochemical and dosage characteristics.

The main barriers are operational:

• Maintaining approved manufacturing controls.
• Securing qualified API suppliers.
• Supporting stability data.
• Managing low-volume production economics.
• Meeting current good manufacturing practice requirements.
• Keeping the product commercially available through distribution channels.

Intellectual-property barriers are substantially weaker than manufacturing and regulatory execution barriers. No patent moat is apparent around the conventional tablet.

Key Takeaways

• Triavil 4-50 is the historical fixed-dose combination of perphenazine 4 mg and amitriptyline 50 mg.
• Its core patent and exclusivity period expired long ago.
• No meaningful current Orange Book patent barrier or Paragraph IV opportunity is apparent.
• Biosimilar competition does not apply.
• Revenue data are not publicly reported at the product level.
• The commercial market is small, mature, price-sensitive, and dependent on generic supply.
• Separate amitriptyline and perphenazine products are stronger substitutes because they permit independent dosing.
• The principal commercial risk is product withdrawal or intermittent supply, not patent litigation.
• A relaunch would require distribution execution or a differentiated formulation to generate material value.
• The product has limited standalone investment potential without a broader generic portfolio or specialty-channel strategy.

FAQs About Triavil 4-50

Is Triavil 4-50 still commercially available?

Availability depends on jurisdiction, manufacturer, and inventory. The historical brand has limited current commercial relevance, while generic or equivalent products may remain available in selected markets.

What is the generic name for Triavil 4-50?

The generic description is perphenazine 4 mg and amitriptyline hydrochloride 50 mg tablets.

Does Triavil 4-50 have patent protection?

The conventional product does not have a commercially meaningful active patent estate. Any historical patents would not prevent ordinary generic competition today.

Can Triavil 4-50 be substituted with separate tablets?

Clinically, separate perphenazine and amitriptyline tablets can reproduce the active ingredients, but substitution must account for the fixed 4 mg/50 mg ratio, patient-specific dosing, prescriber instructions, and applicable pharmacy law.

Why did Triavil 4-50 decline commercially?

Its decline reflects genericization, competition from newer psychiatric medicines, safety and tolerability concerns, reduced branded promotion, and the greater dosing flexibility of separate ingredients.

References

1. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (n.d.-a). Perphenazine and amitriptyline hydrochloride tablets: Prescribing information. FDA.

2. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (n.d.-b). Approved drug products with therapeutic equivalence evaluations. FDA.

3. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (n.d.-c). Drugs@FDA: FDA-approved drugs database. FDA.

4. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (n.d.-d). Orange Book: Approved drug products with therapeutic equivalence evaluations. FDA.

5. DailyMed. (n.d.). Perphenazine and amitriptyline hydrochloride tablet labeling. National Library of Medicine.