You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

October 3, 2016

Data Exclusivity for Biologics in Vietnam: Present and Future Regulations

Biologics are composed of complex, large molecules, as opposed to the small molecules that make up conventional chemically derived drugs. Because of the complex nature of biologics, clinical trials and data collections are expensive to produce and require a heightened level of data exclusivity protection beyond those of a patent to incentivize biologic producers to continue research on new biologics.

Vietnam has a period of data exclusivity for all drugs including biologics; however, this period does not consist of complete data exclusivity, rather only the protection of physical data from the assessment of other generic companies. In practice, such data protection periods do not help to prevent the granting of Marketing Authorization for generics, including biosimilars.

Under current legislation in Vietnam, biologics are broadly defined as medicinal products of biological origin used for the purposes of prophylaxis, therapy, and the diagnosis of human diseases. Consequently, both biologics and biosimilars are considered to be biologics and have the same data exclusivity management by competent authorities. Accordingly, both biologics and biosimilars must have clinical data to apply for a Marketing Authorization; therefore, biosimilar companies do not need to use the clinical data of biologics companies for regulatory submissions. Because of this, the “data exclusivity” period in Vietnam is not practical in practice.

The National Assembly of Vietnam passed the new Law on Pharmacy, which provides different definitions and management measurements for biologics and biosimilars. Consequently, biosimilars manufacturers may not be required to provide clinical data because they can rely on the clinical data of innovative biologics producers to prove the safety and efficacy of the drugs. Overall, Vietnam’s increased level of involvement in trade agreements, such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the European Union-Vietnam Free Trade Agreement (EVFTA), and the new Law on Pharmacy will require slight (but important) changes  in Vietnam’s current data exclusivity protections of biologics.

Current Protections

Currently, Vietnam does not have any specific regulations enacted that protect data exclusivity for biologics; however, biologics are subjected to the same data protection as small molecule drugs. There are two different Vietnamese regulations that address data exclusivity for drugs:

  1. Article 128 of the Law on Intellectual Property (Art. 128 of the IP Law) requires that when applicants for a license for trading in or circulating pharmaceuticals is required to supply test results or other data that the applicant requests to be kept secret, the licensing body must not grant licenses to subsequent applicants who use the secret data without the prior applicant’s consent.
  2. Circular No. 05/2010/TT-BYT (Circular 05) allows for a five-year period of data exclusivity from the granting of marketing authorization for drugs that are new chemical entities (NCE). Parties who file their registration dossier by referring to the data of a previous party that is protected under Circular 05, will be denied marketing authorization by the DAV if they file the data without the permission of the previous party and without proof that the NCE was created independently of the previous party’s data.

There is some debate in Vietnam as to whether Art. 128 of the IP Law and Circular 05 are in conflict. Circular 05 only prevents the DAV from granting marketing authorization to parties who refer to the data in the dossier of a previous party. To get around this regulation, subsequent parties can simply not refer to the previous party’s dossier and have marketing authorization granted.

Under Circular 44/2015/TT-BYT, all biologics, including biosimilars, are required to have their trial data submitted in registration dossiers for marketing authorization. In practice, however, the data protection regulations are of little help in protecting biologic reference products for the following two reasons:

  1. By their nature, biosimilars are not identical copies of their originators. In addition to a thorough analytical assessment, head-to-head clinical studies against the originator are needed to establish comparability to the originator; therefore, biosimilars are often required to have their own trial data for regulatory submissions. Consequently, there is no need to use the protected data of the originator.

  2. Vietnam has no definition of biosimilars or specific regulations about requirements for trial data for biosimilars; therefore, some biosimilars with very limited trial data may be approved for marketing authorization.

Expected Challenges in Protection: TPP

Article 18.50 of the TPP protects undisclosed tests and other data submitted as a condition for granting marketing approval for a new pharmaceutical product. This is accomplished by not allowing third parties to submit the information in the undisclosed tests and other data, without the consent of the party that submitted the data, in order to market the same or similar product.  In the TPP there is a specific provision that applies the protection afforded by Article 18.50 to biologics. In particular, Article 18.51 of the TPP provides effective market protection for new biologics through either:

  1. Data protection as indicated in Article 18.50 for at least eight years from the date of first marketing authorization; or, alternatively
  2. Data protection as indicated in Article 18.50 for at least five years from the date of first marketing authorization, combined with other measures. 


The main difference between the TPP and Vietnam’s current regulations is that for biologic drugs, the TPP provides an extended term of data protection, eight years as opposed to five years, or alternatively, five years combined with other additional measures. It is anticipated that the corresponding provisions of the IP Law and the Pharmacy Law of Vietnam will likely be amended to provide measures to prevent generic drug producers from applying for marketing authorization, instead of only maintaining confidentiality of the clinical data of innovators. The five-year duration of data protection is likely to be preserved. Actually, the DAV had plan to build a legislation to provide measures to prevent generic drug producers from applying for marketing authorization.

Expected Challenges in Protection: EVFTA

In Article 9 of the EVFTA, the agreement requires the parties to issue the legal framework for protecting “undisclosed test[s] and other data” against unfair commercial use. The agreement also requires that the period for protection shall not be less than five years from the date on which the Party grants approval to the patent owner that produced the data. In Vietnam, only undisclosed tests and trade secrets are currently protected, while the EVFTA requires that the parties open their scope of protection to include not only undisclosed tests, but also “other data.”

In response to Article 9 of the EVFTA, the DAV should consider amending domestic regulations to protect all data that applicants of new drugs submit to the DAV while requesting marketing authorization, not just the submitted trial data.

Conclusion

Overall, biologics manufacturers, both internationally and domestically, can expect to see no increase in the amount of time the DAV will grant data exclusivity for biologics. In comparison to data exclusivity protections in countries like the U.S., where the period of exclusivity is granted for twelve years, biologic manufacturers are at a bit of a disadvantage in Vietnam due to the lessened time of protection; however, biosimilar producers will be able to release their products in much shorter periods of time, thus allowing for biologics to be available at lower prices.

If Vietnam does decide to not grant biosimilar manufacturers marketing authorization within the period of data exclusivity, biologic manufacturers will stand to benefit by being the sole producer of the biologic during that period. Biologic manufacturers will also benefit from the potential increase in the type of data protected under the EVFTA, as protections may extend from just trial data to all types of data submitted.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

February 24, 2022
The enactment of Thailand’s Narcotics Code, effective December 10, 2021, marked a key milestone in promoting the commercial applications of cannabis (both marijuana and hemp) and kratom as economic plants—with subsequent regulatory developments continuing this push. For many decades, cannabis and kratom were classified as category 5 narcotics under the Narcotics Act. However, a movement for the legalization of cannabis and kratom developed over time. First, the legalization of marijuana (Cannabis indica) for medical purposes became effective on February 19, 2019, as prescribed in Amendment No. 7 of the Narcotics Act. Kratom has also been effectively decriminalized (covering consumption, production, disposal, and possession for any purpose) since August 24, 2021, as prescribed in Amendment No. 8 of the Narcotics Act. The laws governing narcotic and psychotropic substances in Thailand have now taken a significant step forward with the passage of the Narcotics Code, which is intended to be a comprehensive law covering all narcotics and psychotropic substances in Thailand. Most recently, the Ministry of Public Health announced in the Government Gazette on February 2, 2022, that only cannabis extract (both marijuana and hemp) with THC of more than 0.2% by weight will be classified as a category 5 narcotic. This means that seeds, cannabis plants, and inflorescences, if harvested in Thailand, have been removed from the list of category 5 narcotics. Although the changes to Thailand’s narcotics regulations for cannabis and kratom are intricate, both cannabis and kratom have become a topical issue for farmers and related industries. The plants are new cash crops and have attracted widespread public interest. Currently, we can see fresh kratom leaves and fresh cannabis leaves sold in the market. Unlike products with cannabis derivatives, kratom-based products are not yet available in the Thai market. Although there is an opportunity for developing kratom-based products
December 10, 2021
Indonesia’s National Agency of Drug and Food Control (BPOM) has issued a regulation to amend the country’s food labeling regulations by instituting various additional restrictions and providing additional clarity on food labeling requirements—not only for final food products but also for food additives and food products for further processing. The additions are contained in Regulation No. 20 of 2021 (an amendment to Regulation No. 31 of 2018), which took effect on August 2, 2021. The deadline to comply with the new labeling requirements for final food products is December 31, 2021, and the deadline for requirements related to food additives and food products for further processing is August 2, 2022. The new requirements introduced by the latest regulation are outlined below. Final Food Products Non-halal foods. The new regulation clarifies that food products containing non-halal ingredients are exempt from halal certification requirements. This provision is important as it explicitly confirms that non-halal food products can still be sold and distributed in Indonesia. Ingredient percentages. Percentages of ingredient content must be included in the list of ingredients on a food label, and on any ingredients that are emphasized on the label in words or pictures, or stated as part of the food name. Polyol warning. Labels for food products containing polyol must now include a warning to this effect. Allergen information. The new regulation provides an alternative for indicating allergen information on the food label. Under the 2018 regulation, allergens had to be indicated in the ingredients list in bold type, and the label had to have the disclaimer “contains allergens, see list of ingredients printed in bold.” The new regulation, however, allows allergen information to be declared on the label with the phrase “contains allergens:” followed by the allergen name(s) printed in bold. With this new alternative, it is
November 29, 2021
On November 25, 2021, the Myanmar Investment Commission (MIC) issued a list of investment sectors that will receive priority attention in order to encourage national development and state building. The investment activities that MIC will prioritize are the following: Fertilizer manufacturing Cement manufacturing Iron and steel manufacturing Agriculture and livestock farming and related industries Value-added manufacturing of foodstuffs Electric vehicle manufacturing Pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturing Public transportation services Both foreign investors and local investors may invest in these sectors, and the MIC, ministries, and relevant state and regional governments will provide necessary assistance to the investors under the Myanmar Investment Law 2016. For more details on the new requirements, please contact Tilleke & Gibbins at [email protected] or +95 9 772 440 001.
November 24, 2021
On November 8, 2021, the Vietnamese government issued Decree No. 98/2021/ND-CP on the Management of Medical Devices (“Decree 98”). The new decree will take effect from January 1, 2022, replacing Decree No. 36/2016/ND-CP and its amendments on the same subject (“Decree 36”). Below are the main highlights of Decree 98: 1. Classification of Medical Devices Under Decree 98, responsibility for the classification of medical devices is given to the organization registering or declaring the medical device. Under Decree 36, this responsibility was reserved for Vietnamese organizations qualified for medical device classification. 2. Clinical Trials of Medical Devices Decree 98 provides stricter and more detailed requirements on clinical trials. Particularly, medical device trials will include three phases, in which phases 1 and 2 need to be finished before the product registration, while phase 3 will be conducted after the medical devices are approved for circulation, following the specific requirement from the authorities. This requirement aims to continue evaluating the safety and efficacy of medical devices after they are widely used in the community in line with their usage conditions. 3. Medical Device Registration Similar to the current regulations, Decree 98 requires that medical devices must be registered with the Vietnamese authority (i.e., must obtain registration numbers) before being imported/manufactured for circulation in the Vietnam market. However, Decree 98 further stipulates new requirements as below. Validity of registration numbers Under Decree 98, the registration numbers for all classes of medical devices, not only Class A medical devices as in the current regulations, are valid indefinitely, except for registration numbers granted under the emergency registration procedure. Registration procedure for Class A/B medical devices Instead of having to register with the central level authority with a complex registration dossier as currently required, Decree 98 allows Class B medical devices to be subject to