Antivenin (micrurus fulvius) - Biologic Drug Details

Summary for antivenin (micrurus fulvius)

Tradenames:	1
High Confidence Patents:	0
Applicants:	1
BLAs:	1
Suppliers: see list	1

Note on Biologic Patents

Matching patents to biologic drugs is far more complicated than for small-molecule drugs.

DrugPatentWatch employs three methods to identify biologic patents:

1. Brand-side disclosures in response to biosimilar applications

These patents were identified from disclosures by the brand-side company, in response to a potential biosimilar seeking to launch. They have a high certainty of blocking biosimilar entry. The expiration dates listed are not estimates — they're expiration dates as indicated by the brand-side company.

2. General brand-side disclosures

These patents were identified from searching drug labels and other general disclosures from the brand-side company. This list may exclude some of the patents which block biosimilar launch, and some of these patents listed may not actually block biosimilar launch. The expiration dates listed for these patents are estimates, based on the grant date of the patent.

3. Patents from broad patent text search

For completeness, these patents were identified by searching the patent literature for mentions of the branded or ingredient name of the drug. Some of these patents protect the original drug, whereas others may protect follow-on inventions or even inventions casually mentioning the drug. The expiration dates listed for these patents are estimates, based on the grant date of the patent.

1) High Certainty: US Patents for antivenin (micrurus fulvius) Derived from Brand-Side Litigation

No patents found based on brand-side litigation

2) High Certainty: US Patents for antivenin (micrurus fulvius) Derived from Company Disclosures

No patents found based on company disclosures

3) Low Certainty: US Patents for antivenin (micrurus fulvius) Derived from Patent Text Search

No patents found based on company disclosures

Antivenin (micrurus fulvius) Market Analysis and Financial Projection Experimental

Market Dynamics and Financial Trajectory for Antivenin (Micrurus fulvius)

Introduction

The market for antivenin, specifically for the treatment of coral snake envenomations caused by Micrurus fulvius, is a niche but critical segment within the biologic drug industry. This article will delve into the market dynamics, financial trajectory, and the challenges faced by this specific antivenom.

Market Overview

The antivenom market is driven by the need to treat snakebite envenomations, which pose a significant public health burden, particularly in regions where venomous snakes are prevalent. For coral snake envenomations, the primary focus is on the North American Coral Snake Antivenin (NACSA), also known as Antivenin (Micrurus fulvius)[1][2][5].

Key Players and Products

North American Coral Snake Antivenin (NACSA)

• Manufacturer: Wyeth Pharmaceuticals (now part of Pfizer)
• Indication: Treatment of envenomation by Micrurus fulvius fulvius (Eastern Coral Snake) and Micrurus fulvius tenere (Texas Coral Snake)[1][2].
• Status: Production was discontinued by Wyeth in 2006, leading to a shortage. However, existing stocks were managed to meet historical needs until 2008[2].

Alternative Antivenoms

• Coralmyn: Produced by Bioclon, a Mexican company, this antivenom is an alternative for treating coral snake envenomations. It has shown effectiveness in neutralizing venom from both M. f. fulvius and M. t. tener[2].
• Other Antivenoms: Antivenoms produced in Australia, Costa Rica, and other regions may also be used as alternatives, although they are not FDA-approved for use in the United States[5].

Market Challenges

Supply and Demand

• The discontinuation of NACSA production by Wyeth Pharmaceuticals created a significant supply gap, highlighting the vulnerability of the market to single-source suppliers[2].
• The demand for antivenom is relatively low compared to other biologic drugs, which can make it less economically viable for manufacturers to produce and maintain stock.

Regulatory Environment

• FDA approval is crucial for the marketability of antivenoms in the United States. The lack of FDA approval for alternative antivenoms like Coralmyn limits their use in the US market[5].
• Regulatory hurdles and the need for clinical trials can slow down the introduction of new antivenoms.

Clinical Efficacy and Safety

• The efficacy of antivenoms can vary. For instance, NACSA is effective against M. f. fulvius but not against M. t. tener venom, while Coralmyn can neutralize both[2].
• Safety concerns, such as allergic reactions to equine-derived antivenoms, also impact market dynamics.

Financial Trajectory

Production Costs

• The production of antivenoms is complex and costly due to the need for venom collection, animal immunization, and purification processes. These costs are reflected in the final product price[3][4].

Pricing and Accessibility

• Antivenoms are generally expensive due to their specialized production process and the low volume of demand. This can make them inaccessible in many regions, particularly in rural or underdeveloped areas[4].

Revenue and Market Size

• The market size for coral snake antivenom is relatively small due to the limited incidence of coral snake bites. This restricts the revenue potential for manufacturers.
• The revenue generated from antivenom sales is often insufficient to justify the high production costs, making it a financially challenging market to operate in.

Emerging Trends and Innovations

New Generation Antivenoms

• There is a shift towards developing third-generation antivenoms, which are more purified and have fewer side effects. For example, a new polyvalent antivenom produced in Colombia has shown promising results in neutralizing venom from various Micrurus species[4].

Alternative Delivery Methods

• Research into different delivery methods, such as intravenous (IV) versus intramuscular (IM) administration, is ongoing. IV administration has shown faster and more effective neutralization of venom in some studies[3].

Clinical and Preclinical Studies

Efficacy Studies

• Studies have shown that Coralmyn antivenom can effectively neutralize three LD50 doses of venom from both M. t. tener and M. f. fulvius, while NACSA only neutralizes M. f. fulvius venom[2].

Pharmacokinetic Studies

• The pharmacokinetics of antivenoms vary significantly depending on the route of administration. IV administration results in a faster rise in antivenom serum concentration, while IM administration leads to a slower but more sustained release[3].

Regulatory and Ethical Considerations

FDA Approval and Compliance

• The FDA plays a crucial role in regulating antivenoms. Manufacturers must comply with strict guidelines to ensure safety and efficacy[1][5].

Ethical Implications

• The use of equine-derived antivenoms raises ethical concerns regarding animal welfare. Newer antivenoms are being developed with improved purity and reduced animal-derived components[4].

Key Takeaways

• The market for antivenin (Micrurus fulvius) is characterized by a limited supply, high production costs, and regulatory challenges.
• Alternative antivenoms like Coralmyn offer promising solutions but face regulatory hurdles.
• Emerging trends include the development of third-generation antivenoms and alternative delivery methods.
• Clinical and preclinical studies are crucial for establishing efficacy and safety.

FAQs

What is the primary antivenom used for treating coral snake envenomations?

The primary antivenom is North American Coral Snake Antivenin (NACSA), also known as Antivenin (Micrurus fulvius)[1].

Why was the production of NACSA discontinued?

Wyeth Pharmaceuticals discontinued the production of NACSA in 2006, citing supply management issues and historical demand fulfillment until 2008[2].

What are the alternative antivenoms available for coral snake envenomations?

Alternatives include Coralmyn produced by Bioclon, and other antivenoms produced in Australia and Costa Rica, although these are not FDA-approved for use in the US[5].

How do the pharmacokinetics of antivenoms differ based on the route of administration?

IV administration results in a faster rise in antivenom serum concentration, while IM administration leads to a slower but more sustained release[3].

What are the emerging trends in antivenom development?

Emerging trends include the development of third-generation antivenoms with improved purity and alternative delivery methods such as IV and IM administration[3][4].

Sources

1. FDA: Coral Snake Antivenom | FDA
2. Science.gov: coral snake venom: Topics by Science.gov
3. MDPI: Snake Antivenoms—Toward Better Understanding of the ...
4. MDPI: Standard Quality Characteristics and Efficacy of a New Third ...
5. ACEP: Coral Snake Envenomations: Just Keep Breathing - ACEP