Yeah, excellent questions @budobank. There's quite a few threads in the past that discuss this, but my thoughts are as follows.
It's true the patent applications are not for the drug itself. While it might be simpler to be able to patent a novel compound, and a naive understanding of patent law might lead you to think you NEED a novel compound to get a patent, this is not the case and it certainly doesn't mean that NOX will not be able to gain IP protection.
NOX have filed multiple patents that cover the formulation, delivery method, and in combination with other therapies. If granted, this is enough to have protection for long enough; as even if a different formulation is discovered, a competitor would have to go through multiple trials over multiple years to get their competing product to market. And what patient would want to go into a randomsised trial for what is probably a "bio similar"?
What makes me think that NOX is likely to succeed in the US really needs pages of explanation, but basically: if Veyonda works, they will be able to get IP protection. If it doesn't work, they won't (but it won't matter!). To support their claims, they need evidence that the specific formulation, delivery method and combinations are actually novel and inventive. The studies to date likely provide that evidence; and if this doesn't satisfy examiners, the upcoming DARRT-2 and CEP-2 certainly will.
And on top of all that; patents are not the only IP protection mechanism. FDA exclusivity in a number of different forms is another option in the very unlikely event that patents are not granted, and provide enough commercial protection to make everyone very wealthy, healthy and happy.
NOX Price at posting:
72.5¢ Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
(20min delay)