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

Subscribe to Updates

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 Professionals

Industries

Life Sciences

Practices

Intellectual Property

Regulatory Affairs

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

June 24, 2024
Thailand’s Minister of Public Health recently promulgated the Ministerial Notification Re: Category 5 Narcotics Which Are Not Cannabis or Hemp Extract and Whose Consumption is Permitted for Treatment of Disease or for Research Purposes (2024). The notification took effect on April 23, 2024. The substances whose regulatory controls are affected by this new notification are psilocybin mushroom (Psilocybe cubensis (Earle) Singer), opium poppy (Papaver somniferum L. and Papaver bracteatum Lindl.), and other plants in these genera from which opium, opium alkaloids, psilocybin, or psilocin may be derived. As a result of this notification, these substances are now classified as category 5 narcotics that can be applied in medical treatment. Without the implementation of this notification, patients could not access newly developed medicines containing these substances, as Thailand’s Narcotic Code prohibits the possession and use of category 5 narcotics. Nonetheless, this does not mean that psilocybin mushrooms and opium can be used without any conditions. There is still a long process to go through before these substances can be used in medical treatment or clinical studies. Under the new notification, the FDA must first approve any medicinal drug formulation containing any of the above substances, and subsequently, the production must be approved for medical use or research purposes. The importation of medicinal drug formulations containing psilocybin mushrooms or opium is not allowed. This seemingly small regulatory change addresses the previous legal obstacle to the research and development of such medicines. According to the previous regulation, a physician or researcher could apply to the Thai FDA for a license to produce or possess medicines containing the aforementioned narcotics. However, production and consumption are considered different activities, and consuming a narcotic-containing medicine, even if it was produced under a valid license, is prohibited by the Narcotics Code and is punishable by imprisonment,
Read More
June 11, 2024
Advances in biotechnology have enabled the development of a range of new agricultural tools. From DNA sequencing to plant tissue culture and gene editing, these advances are facilitating the development of better crops. Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are one well-known example of agricultural biotechnology. GMOs are organisms whose genetic material has been artificially altered by inserting a piece of foreign DNA. This DNA may be synthetic in origin or sourced from other organisms. Genome editing (also called gene editing or GEd) involves making precise changes to an organism’s genome without the integration of foreign DNA elements. Several approaches to genome editing have been developed. A well-known one is called CRISPR-Cas9, in which scientists make precise “cuts” in the DNA to create a new genetic variation. Unlike with GMOs, this introduces only minor modifications that are indistinguishable from natural mutations, typically by transplanting genes that code desirable traits from one species into another. GEd technology has been recognized and supported by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). Thirteen FAO-member countries who are also members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) announced their support of the use of GEd technology for commercial uses and consumption at a recent WTO meeting. In addition, over 40 countries around the world, such as Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, China, England, Japan, Kenya, the Philippines, Russia, the UK, and the US, have published policies emphasizing that foods free of transgenes (i.e., foods that do not contain genes transferred from external sources) are not GMOs, concluding that GEd plants are as safe as normal plants. In February 2024, the European Parliament approved new genomic techniques (NGTs), or GEd. As a result, plants that are produced using GEd technology are not classified by the EU as GMOs, and the EU
Read More
February 14, 2024
Thailand is preparing to implement new rules on drug importation for clinical studies. The Medicines Regulation Department of Thailand’s Food and Drug Administration (Thai FDA) first issued the Notification Re. Detailed Requirements for Drug Importation into Thailand for Clinical Studies almost a year ago, and the notification is expected to come into effect on March 1, 2024. Key Provisions The notification aims at enhancing the efficiency of conducting clinical studies while ensuring the protection of human subjects participating in such studies within Thailand. Some of its key provisions include: Definition of Clinical Study. The notification defines a “clinical study” as a study of a medicine involving human subjects, conducted to provide supporting evidence for the registration of a medicinal product in Thailand or other countries, including for additional indications or variations of a registration dossier. Compliance with ICH GCP. Clinical studies conducted in Thailand must adhere to the current edition of the International Council for Harmonization of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH) Good Clinical Practice (GCP) guidelines. Clinical Trial Application. Sponsors are required to submit a clinical trial application along with supporting documents to the Thai FDA for approval before commencing a clinical study. The permit remains valid for five years and is renewable. Supply of Investigational Drugs. Sponsors must obtain investigational drugs from manufacturers compliant with Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) standards as recognized by the Thai FDA. Postapproval Obligations. The secretary-general of the Thai FDA may impose postapproval conditions or order investigators to conduct or suspend certain activities to ensure human subject protection and regulatory compliance. Regulatory Oversight. The Thai FDA is responsible for inspecting and overseeing the regulatory compliance of clinical studies, including during prestudy, ongoing, and poststudy phases. The Thai FDA may also conduct inspections of clinical studies conducted overseas. The Thai FDA
Read More
December 15, 2023
As part of its membership in Lex Mundi, Tilleke & Gibbins has published an updated edition of its Guide to Doing Business in Thailand for 2023. This guide outlines the key factors for starting and operating a business in the Thai market. Issues covered include: Investment incentives Financial facilities Exchange controls Import and export regulations Structures for doing business Requirements for the Establishment of a Business Operation of the Business Cessation or Termination of the Business Labor legislation, relations, and supply Tax Immigration requirements This publication is part of Lex Mundi’s Country Guides series prepared by member firms in more than 100 jurisdictions worldwide. The guides serve as a useful resource for planning international business strategy and researching new markets. The full Guide to Doing Business in Thailand is available through the button below.
Read More