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 25, 2016

The Importance of Patents in Drug Tenders in Vietnam

Vietnam Pharma Update

With a population of over 90 million, fast-paced economic growth, and an increasing standard of living, Vietnam has become a market with great potential for original brand name drugs. These drugs are marketed through numerous channels, with drug tenders called by health facilities being one of the most prominent and profitable.

For drug tenders, an original brand name drug can be offered in either a bidding package for generic drugs or a bidding package for original brand name drugs. The latter is more lucrative, of course, due to the higher prices. However, to qualify for the more lucrative bidding package, the drug must first be included in one of the following lists issued by the Ministry of Health (MOH):

  • List of original brand name drugs;
  • List of drugs therapeutically equivalent to original brand name drugs; or
  • List of rare drugs.

As discussed below, for a company to get its drug added to the list of original brand name drugs in Vietnam, the most important factor is being able to prove that the drug is covered in the protection scope of a registered patent. This can be a difficult and time-consuming process without the assistance of an experienced patent expert in Vietnam.

Legal Background

Under Article 2.19 of the currently in force Law on Pharmacy of 2005, “brand name drugs” are defined as drugs with manufacturer-created trade names which differ from their international nonproprietary names or international generic names. There is no further definition, however, of “original brand name drugs.” This term appeared for the first time in Joint Circular No. 01/2012/TTLT-BYT-BTC of the Ministry of Health and Ministry of Finance, dated January 19, 2012, guiding tenders for drug procurement at health facilities (Joint Circular 01). According to Article 3.1 of Joint Circular 01, an “original brand name drug” is a drug permitted for circulation for the first time based on sufficient data regarding its quality, safety, and effectiveness. The same definition is retained under Circular No. 11/2016/TT-BYT, which took effect on July 1, 2016, and replaced Joint Circular 01 and the new Law on Pharmacy which is scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2017. Sometimes, such drugs are referred to as “innovator drugs.”

The procedural requirements for getting a drug recognized as an original brand name drug are found in Decision No. 2962/QD-BYT of the MOH dated August 22, 2012, providing interim guidance on the required documents for recognition of original brand name drugs, drugs with therapeutic equivalence to original brand name drugs, and drugs having documents on bioequivalence, as amended by Decision No. 1545/QD-BYT on May 8, 2013 (collectively, Decision 2962). Accordingly, applicants need to submit an application dossier to the MOH which includes:

  • The standard form requesting the MOH to recognize a drug as an original brand name drug;
  • The patent and an accompanying letter indicating the specific claims which protect the original brand name drug;
  • The patent license agreement if the applicant is not the patent holder;
  • A Certificate of Pharmaceutical Product, Free Sale Certificate, or Marketing Authorization; and
  • Other documents, as necessary.

It is very important to note the requirement of accurately indicating the specific claims of the patent protecting the original brand name drug. The subject of this granted patent, which can be valid or expired, must be: (1) an active compound, if the drug contains one active substance; (2) a combination (mixture) of active compounds, if the drug contains more than one active compound; or (3) a pharmaceutical composition or preparation or formulation for injection, infusion, ocular treatment, spray, implant, transdermal patch, or gel. In addition, this patent must have been granted by the patent office of Australia, Austria, Brazil, Canada, China, Europe, Finland, Germany, Israel, Japan, Korea, Russia, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom, the United States, or Vietnam.

Application dossiers will be examined by a special committee including patent experts from the National Office of Intellectual Property (NOIP) of Vietnam and pharmaceutical experts from the Drug Administration of Vietnam (DAV) under the MOH. Successfully registered drugs will be added to the lists of recognized original brand name drugs (also called “innovator lists” or “IP lists”) issued by the MOH. The first list of original brand name drugs was issued on January 11, 2013. As of August 23, 2016, the MOH has issued 15 lists including 1,041 original brand name drugs, of which three products have been removed.

The Challenge of Proving Patent Coverage

Under the procedural requirements of Decision 2962, it is clear that to be included in the list of “original brand name drugs,” a drug must have been granted a patent, even if that patent is not still valid, and that the granted patent must satisfy certain requirements of subject type and territory.

As a practical matter, the most important factor in getting recognition of original brand name drugs is proving that the subject drug falls within the protection scope of the patent(s) being referred to. A drug may relate to a number of patents granted in various jurisdictions, and therefore, it may be difficult for pharmaceutical companies to determine which patents are suitable for recognition purposes. Pharmaceutical companies are advised to follow the process below:

Step 1:  Choose patents granted by any of the 17 patent offices accepted for such purpose in Vietnam.

Step 2:  Screen these patents by reviewing the granted claim sets for the accepted subject types (i.e., compound, combination, or composition patents).

Step 3:  To prove that the patent(s) covers the drug, select a basic compound patent (for drugs with one active substance) or a combination patent (for drugs with two or more active substances).

For drugs containing active substances of a chemical nature whose relevant compound patents are characterized by names or structures of the compounds, registration dossiers are likely to go smoothly and will be accepted within about six months. For other drugs, especially biological drugs, the MOH is often very reluctant to examine their registration dossiers, leading to a delay. Therefore, applicants in those cases should submit detailed documentary references (e.g., claim analysis, reliable evidence for structures and other features of active substances in drugs, documents comparing each feature cited in particular claims to the corresponding feature of the active substances in the drugs and comments on the identicalness/similarity of these features, etc.). These references can be helpful in convincing the competent authority that the drugs are or were protected by particular claims in particular patents and to shorten the registration timeline.

Other challenges often arise in proving the chain of title to patents, especially in cases where patent holders have been merged or dissolved.

Summary

Being included in the list of original brand name drugs plays a vital role in tenders called by public health facilities. The later a drug is added to the list of original brand name drugs, the fewer opportunities it will have to participate in original brand name drug tenders. In other words, pharmaceutical companies may miss opportunities to build market share in Vietnam.

To improve the transparency and efficiency of drug tenders, the MOH should complete the legal regulations regarding procedural requirements for getting original brand name drugs recognized. Additionally, the NOIP and the DAV should cooperate to hold seminars or training courses to help pharmaceutical companies get a deeper understanding of patent aspects related to original brand name drug tenders. In the meantime, as a proactive step for their benefit, pharmaceutical companies should consider seeking appropriate assistance from patent experts to effectively handle their patent matters in getting their drugs recognized on the lists of original brand name drugs.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

July 20, 2022
What does “digital health” include within each jurisdiction? Thailand: For the most part, the idea of “digital health” or “telemedicine” has generally fallen within the area of medical device regulation in Thailand. The normal sort of digital health components you would think of—like software and device accessories for diagnosis, monitoring, prevention, or treatment of illnesses—would fall into medical device classification, so long as they do not achieve their intended function by immunological, metabolic, or pharmacological means. The “digital health” devices you commonly think of, like mobile medical apps, wearable technologies and software, fall mainly within this definition. After the last update to the Medical Device Act in 2008, Thailand next looked at digital health in 2019, with the Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA)—which is largely aligned with GDPR principles—and the Cybersecurity Act. These deal with important issues arising from “digital health” and “telemedicine” like personal data protection, consent to use and consent to transfer data, and privacy. Vietnam: Similarly, in Vietnam, while there’s not a clear definition of “digital health” in the law, it is understood to include various types of medical devices, software, and online services used for healthcare purposes—including diagnosis and treatment as well as medical records and telemedicine. There’s no law on digital health, per se, but many of these areas are covered by separate circulars issued by the Ministry of Health. There’s a circular (referred to as “Circular 49”) from late 2017 on telemedicine, for example, that actually uses the term “telemedicine” to identify the industry and sets out licensing and technical requirements. Indicators such as this show that Vietnam is definitely embracing the concept. Indonesia: In Indonesia, there is also no precise definition of “digital health.” Digital health is regulated under several laws and regulations, such as provisions concerning medical devices under the health
July 6, 2022
Patent is an essential piece of the amended Law on Intellectual Property (“Amended IP Law”), which was passed by the National Assembly of Vietnam on June 16, 2022, and will take effect on January 1, 2023 (except for the regulation on protection of experimental data for agrochemical products, which will take delayed effect on January 14, 2024). Among the amended and supplemented contents of the Amended IP Law, there are notable patent-related amendments to Article 60 on assessing the novelty of inventions and Article 96 on grounds for invalidating patent protection titles. We discuss these changes below. Secret Prior Art Under Article 60.1 A significant amendment to Clause 1, Article 60 of the Amended IP Law on the novelty of inventions is to broaden the scope under which an invention can be considered to have lost its novelty. For the first time in Vietnam, “secret prior art” –a patent application with an earlier filing date or priority date but published on or after the filing date or priority date of an examined patent application – is introduced as a prior art document. In the diagram above, at the time of filing of the A2 application, secret prior art A1 has been filed but not yet published, making it inaccessible to the public. At this point, only the A1 applicant and the IP Office are aware of the A1 application. Under the current provisions of the 2005 IP Law, as amended in 2009 and 2019, the A1 patent application is not eligible to be a prior art document when assessing the novelty of A2. However, based on the “first-to-file principle” and the principle of priority, the IP Office has still had other approaches to bar the patentability of an A2 patent application if there is such an A1 application. By
June 13, 2022
Thailand’s cannabis cultivation licensing scheme for the country’s transition toward legalization of the plant has now come to an end. The Ministry of Public Health (MOPH) announced in the Government Gazette that from June 9, 2022, “only cannabis extract with tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) of more than 0.2% by weight will be considered a narcotic.” This means that now anyone can grow, sell, or purchase cannabis seeds, plants, and inflorescence freely in Thailand, and licenses for the cultivation, possession, and distribution of cannabis are no longer required. Neither the number of cannabis plants nor the place of cultivation is restricted. It is thus the beginning of a new chapter for cannabis cultivation in Thailand, with many opining that now is a good time to enter this exciting and growing industry. The journey to this point began in 2019, when Thailand amended its laws on cannabis to allow for treatment for medical purposes, with one of the prerequisite conditions being that the cannabis must be grown in Thailand. The law was further amended to promote commercialization of the cannabis industry, allowing for cannabis to be added to food and beverages, cosmetics, and herbal products. In addition, three traditional cannabis-based formulas were listed in the universal healthcare coverage scheme, which means that almost all Thais have access to traditional cannabis recipes without cost. The successful launch of medical cannabis and its applications, and its viability as an economic industry, have become a national agenda and priority policy of the MOPH. In order to achieve the above outcomes, several legal frameworks and guidelines throughout the product’s lifecycle have been developed. For example, the Thai Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has so far granted licenses to cultivate cannabis (also known as a license to manufacture a narcotic) on more than 1,977 acres (around 800 hectares).
April 19, 2022
New technologies and production processes in the food industry have led to novel foods becoming increasingly important to both food manufacturers and the consuming public worldwide. This is very much the case across a number of jurisdictions in Southeast Asia. “Novel foods” refer to new food production processes, foods, and ingredients that have not yet been commonly used for human consumption, so these innovative foods require safety assessments before companies can produce and market them. While rules for these safety assessments are already part of novel food regulations in several other jurisdictions—such as the novel food regulations in the United Kingdom and European Union adopted in 2003, and the major reform of food safety laws in the United States passed in 2011 under the Food Modernization Act—similar rules governing the assessment of novel foods are relatively new or yet to be introduced in many parts of Asia. Nevertheless, it is important to understand the laws and practices that apply to safety assessments and the process of bringing novel foods to market in jurisdictions in the region. This article provides some clarity in this regard by summarizing important practical information on novel foods and the relevant required safety assessments in Indonesia, Thailand, and Vietnam.   Indonesia Regulator National Agency for Drug and Food Control (NADFC); frequently referred to as BPOM (Badan Pengawas Obat dan Makanan). Relevant Measures BPOM Regulation No. 27 Year 2018 concerning Public Service Standards in BPOM; Decision of the Director of Processed Food Standardization No. HK.02.02.51.511.06.21.21 Year 2021 concerning Public Service Standard Directorate Processed Food Standardization Definitions General “food ingredients” are basic fresh or processed ingredients that can be used to produce food; novel food is any food ingredient not listed in BPOM’s positive list of ingredients. Official Fees None   Process and Timeline Before submitting an