Cipla plans to fight ‘all the way’ for drug rights

CAPE TOWN — JSE-listed drug maker Cipla-Medpro intended taking its fight to sell a generic version of Sanofi Aventis’s cancer drug, docetaxel, all the way to the Constitutional Court, the company said yesterday.

Cipla’s decision follows last week’s ruling by the Supreme Court of Appeal interdicting Cipla from selling its generic docetaxel, pending the outcome of a case before the Patents Court, where the companies are arguing about the validity of Aventis’s patent on the drug, branded Taxotere.

“We believe another court may see it differently,” said Cipla’s medical director, Nic de Jongh.

The fact that Cipla is going to seek leave to appeal against the appeal court’s ruling underscores the importance of oncology drugs to the company, which sells only generic medicines.

Last year, the company made it clear that it saw cancer drugs as a growth market, and that it would bid for state tenders as well as sell oncology products to the private sector. It was first to market with a generic version of docetaxel late last year, prompting Aventis to follow suit with a generic of its own at a 10% price premium.

“If it wasn’t for our launch there would only be Taxotere,” said Dr de Jongh, saying the resulting competition had led to a 50% price cut. Cipla’s product costs R1,000 for 20mg in the private sector, while Taxotere costs R2,048 for the same volume.

Cipla challenged the validity of Aventis’s 2007 patent extension on the drug in the Patents Court, arguing that a change to the solvent used to administer the medicine was not sufficiently novel to warrant patent protection. Aventis in turn sued Cipla, claiming patent infringement. It also sought an interim interdict prohibiting Cipla from selling docetaxel pending the outcome of the patent fight.

The Patents Court refused to grant Aventis an interim interdict against Cipla, prompting the company to take the matter to the Supreme Court of Appeal. The case drew the attention of health activists from the Treatment Action Campaign, who joined as a friend of the court, arguing that the court should include the public’s right to health among its considerations, which it did.

Last week, the Supreme Court of Appeal overturned the lower court’s ruling, and granted the interim interdict to Aventis.