Contents

Talk:Felodipine

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Pharmacology Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PharmacologyWikipedia:WikiProject PharmacologyTemplate:WikiProject Pharmacologypharmacology articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Felodipine. PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles) The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine. Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

the following was added here and again here:

History and Commercialization

On June 19, 1979, Aktiebolaget Hassle (a subsidiary of Astra AB)^[1] filed a patent (U.S. Patent No. 4,264,611) claiming Felodipine to be an antihypertensive drug^[2]. Another patent was filed by Aktiebolaget Hassle on April 3, 1987 seeking to protect their Felodipine time release technology (U.S. Patent No. 4,803,081)^[3]. In 1982, Astra AB licensed the rights to much of its intellectual property to Merck and in 1994 a joint venture between Astra AB and Merck took the form form of Astra Merck ^[4]. The intellectual rights to Plendil remained in Astra Merck’s hands until Astra AB reabsorbed the company in 1998 ^[5]. Under the new agreement, AstraZeneca (formerly Astra AB) was able to acquire (amongst other things) Merck’s stake in Plendil in 2010 as a part of the First Option Agreement established in 1998 ^[6]. On April 29, 2016, AstraZeneca announced that they would be selling the commercial rights to Plendil in China to China Medical System Holdings for 310 million USD^[7]. AstraZeneca will continue to make Plendil in China while China Medical System Holdings sells the drug in China. AstraZeneca would still maintain rights to Plendil outside China ^[7].

Plendil in its current form has been on the market since the early 1990s^[8].The patent for the Felodipine technology (U.S. Patent No. 4,264,611) was set to expire June 19, 1999^[9]. However, A patent extension under 35 USC §156 - which allows for extensions to account for initial regulatory review delays - moved the patent expiration to June 19, 2001 ^[9]. After the patent for Felodipine expired, generics began to enter the market and AstraZeneca’s Revenue from the drug would decrease.

Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. There is more info on Phabricator and on MediaWiki.org.

^{[6][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20]}

There are scads of problems with this. It relies too much on patents (including things on google docs!) and that is WP:OR - we would need a secondary source identifying the relevant patents. The source http://www.referenceforbusiness.com copies most of its content from Wikipedia and cannot be used as a source per WP:RS. Please know that I really, really like content about history and commercialization of drugs and this is promising; some of it can stay but a lot needs to be based on better sources and fixed. The table of annual sales is a level of detail that we don't usually include on articles about drugs. Kind of interesting and maybe worth discussing...need to think about how to get further input on this. Jytdog (talk) 19:07, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The edits made below should address the issues you had with the use/citation of the patents mentioned. The new url links to the google patent page instead of the patent itself. Beyond the first two sentences, the patents are not cited again. I would like to include the graph as I believe it exhibits an interesting correlation between revenue and when generics entered the market.Factappreciation (talk) 01:46, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

History and Commercialization

On June 19, 1979, Aktiebolaget Hassle (a subsidiary of Astra AB) filed a patent (U.S. Patent No. 4,264,611) claiming Felodipine to be an antihypertensive drug^[1][2]. Another patent was filed by Aktiebolaget Hassle on April 3, 1987 seeking to protect their Felodipine time release technology (U.S. Patent No. 4,803,081)^[1][3].

In 1982, Astra AB licensed the rights to much of its intellectual property to Merck and in 1994 a joint venture between Astra AB and Merck took the form form of Astra Merck ^[4]. The intellectual rights to Plendil remained in Astra Merck’s hands until Astra AB reabsorbed the company in 1998 ^[5]. Under the new agreement, AstraZeneca (formerly Astra AB) was able to acquire (amongst other things) Merck’s stake in Plendil in 2010 as a part of the First Option Agreement established in 1998 ^[6]. On April 29, 2016, AstraZeneca announced that they would be selling the commercial rights to Plendil in China to China Medical System Holdings for 310 million USD^[7]. AstraZeneca will continue to make Plendil in China while China Medical System Holdings sells the drug in China. AstraZeneca would still maintain rights to Plendil outside China ^[7].

Plendil in its current form has been on the market since the early 1990s^[8].The patent for the Felodipine technology (U.S. Patent No. 4,264,611) was set to expire June 19, 1999^[9]. However, A patent extension under 35 USC §156 - which allows for extensions to account for initial regulatory review delays - moved the patent expiration to June 19, 2001 ^[9]. After the patent for Felodipine expired, generics began to enter the market and AstraZeneca’s Revenue from the drug would decrease.

Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. There is more info on Phabricator and on MediaWiki.org.

^{[6][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20]}

Hey, sorry. I got caught up in some other things. we need to rework the beginning based on good secondary sources; citing stuff to the court decision is not the best way to go. There are good books on drug discovery that will cover the discovery by Astra of the drug. We can use the news articles for the Astra/Merck interactions. Am still scratching my head over the sales chart. This comes very close to WP:OR. I think I might post at WP:ORN and see what folks there think... which I did: Wikipedia:No_original_research/Noticeboard#Constructing_a_sales_chart Jytdog (talk) 00:40, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK, this is mostly implemented now. Not the chart yet - see the discussion at ORN linked above. Feedback there is... interesting. Jytdog (talk) 05:43, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]