throbber
Parallel Development of Multiple Crystal Forms
`for a New Drug Candidate: Selection of the Final
`Form via Integrated Chemical and Pharmaceutical
`Process Evaluation
`Speakers
`Cindy Starbuck, Patricia Hurter, Robert Wenslow
`Co-authors
`Joseph Armstrong, Alex Chen, Stephen Cypes,
`Russell Ferlita, Karl Hansen, Mahmoud Kaba, Ivan Lee, Dina Zhang
`
`Contributors
`
`Danielle Euler, Tom Gandek, Jeff Givand, Brad Holstine, Feng Li, Yun Liu, Ernestina
`Luna, Kari Lynn, Robert Meyers, James Ney, Saurabh Palkar, Leigh Shultz, Iris Xie
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 1
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Outline
`
`Salt Selection
`Desired particle properties for early formulation work
`Crystallization studies
`Polymorph characterization
`Development targets
`Emergence of a new crystal form during late stage development
`Chemical/Physical characterization
`Formulation characterization
`Biocomparability
`
`2
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 2
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Early Salt Selection Activities
`
`For rapid entry into Phase I, wanted dry filled capsule
`Salt selection focused on morphology as well as stability (v. soluble drug,
`bioavailability good)
`Targeted DC process for market formulation
`
`Salt A
`
`Salt B
`
`Phosphate
`
`3
`
`SEMs from Dina Zhang
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 3
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Early Salt Selection - Stability
`
`All salts stable in bulk at 80oC/amb and 40oC/75%RH
`Hydrolysis and deamination occur in solution
`
`Deamination
`Free Base
`Phosphate
`Salt B
`Salt A
`
`0
`
`1
`
`3
`2
`Weeks
`
`4
`
`5
`
`50
`
`40
`
`30
`
`20
`
`10
`
`0
`
`% Deamination in Solution
`
`Hydrolysis
`
`Free Base
`Phosphate
`Salt B
`Salt A
`
`0
`
`1
`
`3
`2
`Weeks
`
`4
`
`5
`
`50
`
`40
`
`30
`
`20
`
`10
`
`0
`
`% Hydrolysis in Solution
`
`Phosphate salt chosen for Phase I, on the basis of morphology and
`stability
`
`4
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 4
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Market Formulation Development
`
`Initial studies
`Probe formulations for excipient compatibility
`Investigation of physical stability, with wet granulation and compression
`Compaction simulator studies
`Investigation of feasible drug loading range (1% to max.)
`Process selection
`Wet granulation, roller compaction, direct compression options
`DC most desirable if particle characteristics amenable
`If DC promising, two processes in parallel until delivery of API from pilot
`plant lot
`
`5
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 5
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Excipient/Process Choices
`
`PVP
`
`HPC
`
`PVP
`
`Dry - Avicel
`Dry - Mannitol
`Wet - Avicel
`Wet - Mannitol
`
`Dry process more stable
`API properties (flow,
`compactibility, bulk density)
`suitable for DC processing
`Blend uniformity not an issue,
`drug loading ~ 25%
`
`HPC
`PVP
`
`HPC
`
`-1
`
`-0.5
`
`0
`Drug load
`
`0.5
`
`HPC
`
`PVP
`HPC
`HPC
`PVP
`1
`
`1.5
`
`PVP
`
`DC selected as the lead process and RC developed
`as a back-up
`
`6
`
`3.5
`
`3
`
`2.5
`
`2
`
`1.5
`
`1
`
`0.5
`
`% area deg after 4 wk 60C/amb
`
`0
`-1.5
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 6
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Desired Particle Characteristics for Early Development
`
`Particle size distribution
`Mean of 20-200µ, unimodal distribution, low fines
`Particle shape
`Not needles (rods, plates, cubic, spherical)
`Stickiness
`Hard to quantify, affected by size and morphology, residual solvent (?),
`polymorph (?)
`Bulk density
`High enough for processing
`Flow
`Acceptable flow for processing
`Compactability and compressibility
`Forms integral compacts with acceptable hardness at required drug
`loading
`
`7
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 7
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Small-Scale Evaluation of API Characteristics
`
`Prior to first pilot plant campaign, extensive evaluation of effect
`of crystallization conditions on API characteristics and
`pharmaceutical processability
`SEM examination (morphology, agglomeration)
`Particle size distribution (mean, fines, unimodal, width of distribution)
`Compaction simulator
`Neat drug vs formulated
`Measure tensile strength, ejection force (binding)
`Sticking evaluation on manual single tablet press
`Flow evaluation
`Bulk/tap density, calculate Carrs I ndex
`
`8
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 8
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Compaction Simulator Results
`Tensile Strength of Compacts
`
`Varying crystallization conditions affected tensile strength of neat
`drug and formulated compacts
`Tensile Strength of Neat Drug
`
`3
`
`100
`200
`300
`400
`Compaction Pressure (MPa)
`
`500
`
`9
`
`2.5
`
`2
`
`1.5
`
`1
`
`0.5
`
`0
`
`0
`
`Tensile Strength (MPa)
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 9
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Small-Scale Evaluation of Particles
`
`Density
`(g/cc)
`Agg
`Bulk Tap
`?
`Y 0.27 0.37
`Y 0.26 0.40
`Less 0.25 0.44
`Less 0.25 0.44
`Y 0.25 0.43
`Y 0.24 0.45
`N 0.23 0.42
`Y 0.31 0.46
`
`Median
`Size
`Lot#
`(µm)*
`99
`A
`65
`B
`20
`C
`39
`D
`50
`E
`64
`F
`50
`G
`62
`H
`*30s sonication
`Crystallization conditions that would generate material similar to
`Lot A were chosen for the first pilot plant batch
`
`Tensile
`Strength
`Neat Form.
`2.27 3.50
`1.76 3.50
`1.81 3.75
`2.00 3.64
`2.00 2.80
`1.78 2.94
`1.80 3.40
`1.50 3.06
`
`Carr's
`Index
`27
`35
`43
`43
`42
`46
`45
`33
`
`10
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 10
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`First pilot plant batch - process flow diagram
`
`Seed load,
`point,
`PSD optimized
`
`Solvent endpoint
`optimized for yield
`
`1 wt% seed
`
`Ethanol, water
`
`Crystallizer
`
`Drying
`temp stressed
`
`Agitated Filter Dryer
`
`Filter, dry at 40 C
`
`discharge
`
`11
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 11
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`First pilot plant batch - results
`
`Wetcake found to be friable during filtration/drying
`Agitated filter dryer implemented in pilot plant (scaleable)
`Particle size decrease from 43µm (slurry) to 34 µm (wetcake) to 14 µm
`(dry cake)
`
`PSD shift w/ processing
`
`Sonication = 30s
`Drycake
`Wetcake
`Crystallization Slurry
`
`1
`
`10
`
`Particle Size (um)
`
`100
`
`1000
`
`12
`
`15
`
`10
`
`5 0
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 12
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Early deliveries vs First Pilot Plant Batch
`
`Prep Lab
`
`Prep Lab
`
`Pilot Plant Batch 1
`
`Pilot Plant
`
`
` L-224715
`Sonication =30 s
` Lot # 006F0016
`Lot # 006F0017
` PPB#1-2
`
`Prep Lab
`
`Measured size = agglomerate
`size
`
`Agglomerates (+ single
`crystals) found to be shear
`sensitive at large scale
`
`15
`
`10
`
`5
`
`0
`
`Frequency (%)
`
`Frequency %
`
`1
`
`100
`10
`Particle Size (µm)
`Particle Size (um)
`
`1000
`13
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 13
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Second pilot plant batch - process flow diagram
`
`Increase seed
`load to increase
`growth rate
`
`1 wt% seed
`
`Ethanol, water
`
`Crystallizer
`
`Agitated Filter Dryer
`
`Used minimal
`agitation during
`filtration
`
`Filter, dry at 40 C
`
`De-coupled filtration
`from drying; use lower
`shear dryer
`
`14
`
`Conical dryer
`
`discharge
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 14
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Second pilot plant batch - results
`Batch #1
`Batch #2
`
`Batch #3
`
`B#1
`B#2
`B#3
`
`1
`
`10
`
`Particle Size (um)
`
`100
`
`1000
`
`15
`
`10
`
`5
`
`0
`
`% Frequency
`
`15
`
`Lot
`
`Batch#1
`Batch#2
`Batch#3
`
`Bulk Density
`Loose Tapped
`0.30
`0.56
`0.53
`0.76
`0.55
`0.81
`
`Mean
`PSD
`14
`55
`70
`
`Flowdex
`(<25 good)
`34
`18
`16
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 15
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Flowability
`
`Larger PSD API from subsequent pilot plant campaigns improved flow
`and pharmaceutical processability
`
`45
`
`Bad Flow
`
`Flodex (mm)
`
`Good Flow
`
`40
`
`35
`
`30
`
`25
`
`20
`
`15
`
`Prep Lab
`
`Pilot Plant
`
`80
`
`60
`
`40
`
`20
`
`0
`
`Particle Size (um)
`
`1
`
`2
`
`4
`3
`GMP Lots
`
`5
`
`6
`
`16
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 16
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`A new problem emerges: multiple polymorphs!
`
`Batch#
`
`B#1
`B#2
`B#3
`
`+ EtOH
`
`- EtOH
`
`Crystal Form
`Packaged from
`Dryer
`I + III
`II
`II
`
`Crystal Form upon
`Storage
`I + III
`I + III
`I + III
`
`Form II
`
`Form I
`
`?
`
`Form III
`
`Dry in
`Filter in
`Agitated Conical
`Filter/dryer
`Dryer
`
`Package
`
`17
`
`EtOH
`solvate
`
`Slurry
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 17
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Anhydrous Phases
`?
`
`?
`
`?
`
`Channel
`Solvate
`Critical Issues
`
`Form II
`
`Form I
`
`Form III
`
`Which are the MOST relevant phases
`Thermodynamic Stability/Kinetics of Transformation
`Water Solubility (Biopharm Performance)
`Chemical/Physical Stability (API and Tablets)
`Conversion upon drying/grinding/compaction (Pharm Processing)
`CRYSTALLIZATION OF PURE PHASE
`
`18
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 18
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Solvate/Form II
`
`Solvent
`
`Form II
`
`Channel
`Solvate
`Conversion Conditions
`Isomorphic non-stoichiometric channel solvates with many solvents
`Solvate Formation at all solvent/H2O ratios
`Form II is de-solvate
`Identical XRPD/Raman compared to solvate
`SSNMR only method for Form II identification
`Early crystallizations formed solvate then dried to anhydrous Form
`Form II converts to Form I (<10 min) in water slurry
`
`19
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 19
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Form I/Form III
`
`Form I
`
`shear
`
`Form III
`
`Conversion Conditions (From Experience)
`Form III formed during drying/grinding/compaction
`Mixtures of Form I/III in API and formulations
`
`CRYSTALLIZE PURE, STABLE POLYMORPH
`
`Critical Experiments
`Determine thermodynamically stable polymorph at RT
`Identify kinetics of solid-solid conversion as well as solvent mediated conversion
`
`20
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 20
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Thermodynamic Stability
`
`4.98
`
`4.96
`
`4.94
`
`4.92
`
`4.9
`
`4.88
`
`4.86
`
`4.84
`
`4.82
`
`4.8
`
`Ln(Solubility)
`
`ln(solubility)
`
`4.78
`0.00322
`
`0.00324
`
`0.00326
`
`0.00328
`
`0.0033
`
`34 °C
`Forms I and III are very close in energy (10-2 kcal/mol)
`Likely to get mixtures
`solid state turnover during drying - morphology set by Form II template
`solid state turnover during compaction
`
`Form I
`
`Form III
`
`Form I
`
`Form III
`
`0.00334
`
`0.00336
`
`0.00338
`
`0.0034
`
`0.00342
`
`0.00332
`1/T (K-1)
`
`1/T (K-1)
`
`21
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 21
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Anhydrous Phases - characterized
`
`Channel
`Solvate
`
`Solvent
`
`Form II
`
`RT
`
`Form I
`
`shear
`
`Form III
`
`Ttrans = 34 °C
`
`Water Solubility vs.
`Temperature of pure Forms
`
`Drying induces polymorph conversion
`Compaction induces polymorph conversion
`
`MIXTURES
`
`22
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 22
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Polymorphism - Anhydrous Polymorphs
`
`API process produced mixtures of Form I/III
`Experiments were conducted to determine effect of polymorph conversion
`on pharmaceutical processability
`Particle size/fines had a larger effect on processability than form
`
`Flow (shear cell)
`
`Intrinsic Dissolution
`
`Form I
`Form II
`Form III
`
`80x10-3
`
`60
`
`40
`
`20
`
`0
`
`Concentration (mg/ml)
`
`Concentration (mg/ml)
`
`Form III
`Form I (converted Form III)
`
`Form II
`Form I (converted Form II)
`
`50
`100
`150
`200
`Consolidation Stress (g/cm^2)
`Consolidation Stress (g/cm2)
`
`250
`
`0
`
`5
`
`10
`15
`20
`Time (minutes)
`Time (minute)
`
`25
`
`30
`
`23
`
`35
`
`30
`
`25
`
`20
`
`15
`
`10
`
`Unconfined Yield Stress (g/cm2)
`
`Unconfined Yield Stress (g/cm^2)
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 23
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Pure Step Development Goals for Campaign II
`
`Reduce drying time cycle
`Projected factory time cycle for drying > 24 hours
`Understand filtration/drying-mediated attrition
`Minimize fines production (=> associated with sticking?)
`Understand/eliminate drying-mediated polymorph turnover
`Search for alternate (non-solvating) solvent?
`Deliver samples to Pharm R&D for comparative testing
`
`24
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 24
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Solvent screening performed to find non-solvating solvent
`
`Solvent
`
`Water*
`Methanol
`Ethanol
`1-Propanol
`2-Propanol
`t-Butanol
`Cyclohexanol
`Ethyl Acetate
`Acetone
`MIBK
`Butyl Ether
`THF
`n-Hexane
`Cyclohexane
`n-Heptane
`Toluene
`Acetonitrile
`DMF
`DMAC
`DMSO
`MTBE
`Methylene Chloride
`Diethoxymethane
`Methyl Benzoate
`Isoamyl Alcohol
`
`Form a
`Solvate?
`N
`Y
`Y
`Y
`Y
`N
`N
`Y
`Y
`N
`Y
`Y
`N
`N
`N
`N
`Y
`Y
`Y
`Y
`N
`Y
`Y
`N
`N
`
`Becomes
`Amorphous?
`N
`N
`N
`N
`N
`Y
`Y
`N
`N
`N
`N
`N
`N
`N
`N
`Y
`N
`N
`N
`N
`N
`N
`N
`
`N
`
`* = As of Feb 2003
`
`Free Base
`Soluble?
`N
`Y
`Y
`
`Y
`
`Y
`
`Y
`N
`N
`N
`Y
`
`Y
`Y
`Y
`
`Y
`
`25
`
`Phosphate
`Salt Soluble?
`Y
`
`Degrades
`Product?
`N
`
`Miscible with
`Phosphoric
`Acid?
`Y
`
`N
`
`N
`
`N
`N
`N
`N
`Gels
`
`Y
`N
`N
`
`Sparingly
`N
`
`N
`
`Y
`
`N
`
`N
`
`Y
`
`Y
`
`Y
`
`Y
`N
`N
`
`Y
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 25
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Lab work with non-solvating solvent: enter the
`Monohydrate!
`
`Successfully generated Form I directly
`from isoamyl alcohol needle morphology
`
`Incorporated 5% water to improve particle
`size and morphology
`new crystal form emerged !!
`(Monohydrate!)
`
`An aside. . .van t Hoff plot for Forms I/III: solubilities
`measured in water!
`
`26
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 26
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Properties of monohydrate
`
`Water Solubility (free base eq) = 68 mg/ml (Anhydrous = 108 mg/ml)
`Morphology is rod-like
`Non-hygroscopic, picks up <1% at 75%RH (4.5% at 95%RH)
`All anhydrous forms, when put in water, now turn over to monohydrate
`(previously, Form I)
`
`300 µm
`
`100 µm
`
`50 µm
`
`27
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 27
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`New Physical Property Action Plan
`
`Water solubility/tablet dissolution
`Dehydration potential
`Higher hydrates?
`Chemical/Physical API stability
`Physical stability during Milling/Compaction
`
`28
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 28
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Kinetics of Water Loss for Monohydrate
`Isothermal TG N2 Flow
`
`Time (min)
`
`29
`
`Weight %
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 29
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Form Conversion Starting with Monohydrate
`?
`?
`?
`
`Monohydrate
`
`Dehydrated
`monohydrate
`
`Form IV
`
`Form I
`
`Hot stage XRPD
`RT (monohydrate)
`90oC 4 hours (dehydrated monohydrate)
`110oC new spectrum (Form IV confirmed by SSNMR)
`130oC (Form I)
`Back to Ambient (Form I)
`
`INTERCONVERSION
`
`30
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 30
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Hygroscopicity vs. Temperature
`
`Pure Monohydrate
`No Dryer Step, Long Equilibration Time, Lowest RH = 0.8%
`25°C
`40°C
`
`Monohydrate NEVER loses water at 25°C and 40°C >0.8%RH
`Material remains Monohydrate
`
`31
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 31
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Extended Temperature Hygroscopicity Data
`
`Pure Monohydrate
`
`60°C
`
`80°C
`
`0.080
`0.060
`0.040
`0.020
`0.000
`0.00
`
`Weight%
`
`0.250
`0.200
`0.150
`0.100
`0.050
`0.000
`0.00
`
`Adsorption
`Starting Weight
`
`10.00
`
`15.00
`
`20.00
`
`5.00
`
`4.00
`RH%
`60°C Returns to original water content at ~6% RH
`80°C Returns to original water content at ~10% RH
`Material remains Monohydrate
`
`Weight%
`
`Adsorption
`Starting weight
`
`2.00
`
`6.00
`
`8.00
`
`32
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 32
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Solid Phases in Monohydrate System
`
`ambient
`
`DEAD END
`
`Monohydrate
`
`40°C 130°C
`N2 flow
`
`Dehydrated
`monohydrate
`
`60°C 130°C
`
`Form IV
`(anhydrous)
`
`130 ~ 180 C
`
`Form I
`
`RH=98%, RT
`
`Water slurry with
`or without
`monohydrate seed
`
`33
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 33
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`API perspective - the case for monohydrate
`
`Monohydrate
`
`Anhydrous (I/III)
`
`Crystallization IPA/Water or IAA/Water
`IPA/Water or EtOH/Water
`Thermo stab regions mapped vs. H2O content Thermo stab regions mapped vs. water content
`Monohydrate crystallized directly
`
`Agglomerated morphology; Form II template
`
`Drying
`
`No potential for dehydration if dried
`without sweep
`
`Polymorph conversion Form II to I/III mixtures
`
`Bulk Chem Stab 4 wk no degradation
`-20C, 40C, 40C/75RH, 80C
`
`Physical Stab No Physical change on stability
`Bulk and Tablets
`
`Regulatory
`
`Single crystal form
`
`12 month no degradation
`-20C, 40C, 40C/75RH, 60C
`
`Mixtures going into stab
`No change in mixture content on stab
`(bulk and tablets)
`Mixtures; must be controlled
`
`34
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 34
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Pharm processing: evaluation of monohydrate
`
` Anhydrous
`
`Monohydrate
`
`Morphology/Shape
`
`Density [g/cm3]
`Loose
`Tapped
`
`Flodex
`
`Sticking (mg/ml)
`
`Mean Particle Size
`(µm)
`
`0.55
`0.81
`
`19
`
`0.124
`
`77
`
`35
`
`0.28
`0.55
`
`32
`
`0.0043
`
`143
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 35
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

` Monohydrate
` Compressed at 200 Mpa
`
`Effect of Compaction on Form Conversion
`
`Monohydrate
`No form conversion
`
`2000
`
`1500
`
`1000
`
`500
`
`Intensity
`
`Anhydrous:
`Compaction:
`Form II Form I/III
`Form I Form I/III
`Form III Form I/III
`Compaction always results in
`Form I/III mixture
`
` Form II
` Form III
` Compressed Form II
`
`10
`
`20
`Diffraction Angle
`
`30
`
`40
`
`5000
`
`4000
`
`3000
`
`2000
`
`1000
`
`0
`
`Intensity
`
`10
`
`20
`Diffraction Angle
`
`30
`
`40
`
`36
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 36
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Drug Product Processing Effect
`
`Anhydrous
`After Shearing
`All forms (I, II, III)
`Particle breakage
`
`Monohydrate
`No form conversion
`No particle breakage
`
`I/III mix
`
`Monohydrate
`Sheared at 300 rpm
`Sheared at 600 rpm
`
`3
`
`4 5 6 7 8
`
`10
`
`3
`
`2
`
`4 5 6 7 8
`100
`Particle Size (µm)
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4 5 6 7
`
`12
`
`10
`
`8 6 4 2 0
`
`% Frequency
`
`37
`
` Form III
` Shearing
` Tubula Blending
` V-Shell Blending
` FormII
`
`5
`
`10
`
`15
`20
`Diffraction Angle
`
`25
`
`30
`
`35
`
`7000
`
`6000
`
`5000
`
`4000
`
`3000
`
`2000
`
`1000
`
`0
`
`Intensity
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 37
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Tablet Sticking reduced with Monohydrate
`
`5 minute compression run on Korsch press (9kN force)
`Comparable formulations with monohydrate exhibited less punch
`sticking than those with anhydrous polymorph
`
`Anhydrous API Formulation
`
`Monohydrate API Formulation
`
`38
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 38
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Color formation in formulations
`
`Stressed formulations discolor, linked to low levels of impurities in
`excipients
`Monohydrate API less susceptible to discoloration
`Drug substance stressed with impurities at
`various RH, 50oC
`
`Anhydrous
`
`Monohydrate
`
`0.03
`
`0.02
`
`0.01
`
`0.00
`
`Absorbance at
`
`350nm
`
`20
`
`40
`60
`Relative Humidity (%)
`
`80
`
`39
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 39
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Chemical Stability of Monohydrate vs Anhydrous
`
`Chemical stability of monohydrate formulations superior to anhydrous
`
`Open Dish Stability of Comparable Formulations (40oC/75%RH)
`1
`0.9
`0.8
`0.7
`0.6
`0.5
`0.4
`0.3
`0.2
`0.1
`0
`
`Anhydrous I/III
`
`Monohydrate
`
`Total Degradates (% claim)
`
`0
`
`2
`
`4
`
`6
`
`8
`10
`12
`Time (weeks)
`
`40
`
`14
`
`16
`
`18
`
`20
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 40
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Compactability of Monohydrate vs Anhydrous
`
`Initially, monohydrate formulations appeared to have lower tensile
`strength than anhydrous formulations
`
`Tablet Hardness
`
`Anhydrous
`Monohydrate
`
`25% Drug Load
`Formulation A
`
`33% Drug Load
`Formulation B
`
`41
`
`012345678
`
`Tablet Hardness (kPa)
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 41
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Effect of Crystallization Solvent on Monohydrate Properties
`
`Comparing monohydrate from IPA/water vs ISAA/water
`Higher tensile strength
`Stronger crystal strength
`More difficult to lose crystalline water
`
`ISAA/Water
`
`IPA/Water
`
`IPA/Water
`
`ISAA/Water
`
`L-224715-010X011
`66839-113 (unmilled monohydrate)
`L-224715-70223-211
`
`200
`300
`100
`Compaction Pressure (MPa)
`Compaction Pressure (MPa)
`
`400
`
`42
`
`3
`
`2
`
`1
`
`0
`
`0
`
`Tensile Strength (MPa)
`
`Tensile Strength (MPa)
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 42
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Crystal Structure by Atomic Force Microscopy
`IPA/Water
`ISAA/Water
`
`1 µ m
`
`100 nm
`
`2 µ m
`
`Layered
`Structure with a
`thickness of 3.5-
`4.2 nm
`
`1 µ m
`
`43
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 43
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Biopharmaceutical Comparison
`
`High solubility API (68 mg/ml), no effect on absorption expected
`Dog study disaster check confirms no effect on dog PK
`
`Anhydrous and Monohydrate Forms in an HPMC
`Capsule Dosed Orally to Beagle Dogs (n=4)
`
`Anhydrous
`Monohydrate
`
`Plasma Concentration, µM
`
`Time, hours
`
`44
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 44
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

`

`Decision to Switch to Monohydrate Form
`
`Physical stability
`Monohydrate showed improved physical stability over anhydrous forms
`Anhydrous Forms undergo form conversion; loss of crystallinity during drying
`and compaction
`Chemical Stability
`Less color development with monohydrate-based tablets
`Lower levels of degradation with monohydrate vs anhydrous
`Dessicant not required for monohydrate packaging
`Biopharmaceutical equivalence
`Animal studies (mice, rats, dogs) showed exposure levels (PK) equivalent
`Chem Processability
`Reduced concern over Form change and particle breakage during drying.
`Improved yield; streamlined process.
`Pharm Processability
`Reduced sticking on tablet punch.
`
`45
`
`Merck Exhibit 2122, Page 45
`Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
`IPR2020-00040
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket