SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Biotech / Medical : VVUS: VIVUS INC. (NASDAQ) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: RT who wrote (5175)1/31/1998 3:11:00 PM
From: Zebra 365  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 23519
 
One of the Vivus Patents (5474535):

5474535 : Dosage and inserter for treatment of erectile dysfunction
---------------------------------------------------------

21 CLAIMS

We claim:

ÿÿÿÿ1. A dosage form for treating an erectile dysfunction, said dosage form comprising, in combination:

a) a shaft having a diameter that is receivable in the male urethra, said shaft having a proximal end and a blunted distal end;
b) means to prevent complete insertion of said shaft into the urethra on the proximal end of said shaft; and
c) a dose of a therapeutic composition for said erectile dysfunction carried in said shaft prior to insertion in the urethra, said therapeutic composition comprising a therapeutic agent for said erectile dysfunction, wherein said dose weighs less than about 100 mgs, is solid at ambient temperature, and is capable of being dissolved, absorbed, melted or bioeroded in the urethra.

ÿÿÿÿ2. The dosage form of claim 1 further comprising:
d) a cavity containing said therapeutic composition at the blunted distal end of said shaft.

ÿÿÿÿ3. The dosage form of claim 2 further comprising:
e) means for displacing said composition from said cavity into the urethra.

ÿÿÿÿ4. The dosage form of claim 1 wherein said therapeutic composition is positioned in said shaft to be deposited within the urethra between the proximal portion of the fossa navicularis and the distal position of the pendulous urethra.

ÿÿÿÿ5. The dosage form of claim 1 wherein said dose weighs not more than 50 mg of agent.

ÿÿÿÿ6. The dosage form of claim 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 wherein said shaft is from about 2-5 cm in length.

ÿÿÿÿ7. The dosage form of claim 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 wherein said composition comprises a urethral permeation enhancer for said agent.

ÿÿÿÿ8. The dosage form of claim 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 wherein said erectile dysfunction is impotence and said agent comprises one or more vasodilators.

ÿÿÿÿ9. The dosage form of claim 8 wherein said vasodilators are selected from the group consisting of nitrates, long and short acting .alpha.-blockers, calcium blockers, ergot alkaloids, chlorpromazine, haloperidol, yohimbine, natural and synthetic vasoactive prostaglandins and their analogs, vasoactive intestinal peptides, dopamine agonists, opioid antagonists and mixtures thereof.

ÿÿÿÿ10. The dosage form of claim 8 wherein said agent comprises an .alpha.-blocker and a prostaglandin.

ÿÿÿÿ11. The dosage form of claim 8 wherein said agent is selected from the group consisting of about 10-2000 æg of a vasoactive prostaglandin, about 1-50 mg of papaverine, about 1-10 mg of phentolamine, about 50-2000 æg of prazosin, about 50-2000 æg of doxazosin about 50-2000 æg of terazosin and mixtures thereof.

ÿÿÿÿ12. The dosage form of claim 11 wherein said therapeutic composition further comprises polyethylene glycol and said agent comprises an .alpha.-blocker and a prostaglandin.

ÿÿÿÿ13. The dosage form of claim 11 wherein said agent consists essentially of alprostadil and prazosin.

ÿÿÿÿ14. The dosage form of claim 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 wherein said dysfunction is priapism and said agent comprises one or more vasoconstrictors.

ÿÿÿÿ15. The dosage form of claim 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 wherein said dysfunction is Peyronie's syndrome and said agent comprises a material selected from the group consisting of steroidal and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents and mixtures thereof.

ÿÿÿÿ16. The dosage form of claim 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 wherein said dysfunction is priapism and said agent is selected from the group consisting of .alpha.-agonists and .beta.-blockers and mixtures thereof.

ÿÿÿÿ17. The dosage form of claim 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 or 11 wherein said therapeutical composition further comprises polyethylene glycol.

ÿÿÿÿ18. A dosage form for treating erectile dysfunction, said dosage form comprising, in combination:
a) an insert comprising:
(i) a shaft having a proximal end and a distal end sized to be received within the male urethra; and
(ii) a bore within said shaft;
b) a piston slidably received within said bore and movable from a first position where said piston forms a dose receiving cavity proximate to the distal end of said shaft to a second position where said dose is displaced from said cavity; and
c) a dose of a therapeutic composition for said erectile dysfunction comprising said therapeutic agent for said erectile dysfunction, said dose being received in said cavity, wherein said dose is solid at ambient temperature, and is capable of being dissolved, absorbed, melted or bioeroded in the urethra.

ÿÿÿÿ19. The dosage form of claim 18 wherein:
A. the shaft of said insert is closed at said distal end to form a flexible peripheral wall having an interior surface and an exterior surface; and

B. said piston is attached to the interior surface of said peripheral wall, said piston in said first position being withdrawn within said shaft where said flexible peripheral wall forms said cavity enclosing said dose.

ÿÿÿÿ20. The dosage form of claim 18 wherein said dose weighs less than about 50 mg.

ÿÿÿÿ21. The dosage form of claim 20 wherein the length of said shaft potion is from 2-5 cm.

-----------------------------------------------------------



To: RT who wrote (5175)2/1/1998 10:30:00 AM
From: Gene Voss  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 23519
 
RT:This is part of the patent dispute between Vivus and HVSF.I don't have the complete # at hand but a review of HVSF's recent patent will refer to it.Have your local patent atty review the significance of the claims.The claims are always open to challenge which is why HVSF and Vivus are litigating.If you really want to know who has protection and if any exposure exists ask a professional.
My opinion is that the HVSF transurethral technique does infringe but as I said earlier spend the $100 or so and find out don't take my opinion for anything.This is good advice for anyone investing in technological issues when intellectual property and company claims are so important.

GV



To: RT who wrote (5175)2/1/1998 12:04:00 PM
From: Tunica Albuginea  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 23519
 
Rt, in regards to HVSF patent.Several points why I fell comfortable:
-I asked Dave Yntema 7 months ago about " whether Vivus can defend
their patent if somebody found a way to insert a liquid through a
catheter into the urethra " .His answer was yes.They had just come
through defending a patent infringement in the UK.
-A gel is going to present several tecnnical problems:
=More volume will be needed to allow for residual adhering to
plastic.
=More vol will mean: more expense; it will be difficult to dose, if
patient does not express out all of it.
=the gel will be distributed more widely along the length of the
urethra.That means that some of it may go all the way back at the
base where it could theoretically go all the way back into the
bladder.
=in fact if the massage is done inappropriately, the gel could be
massaged right out of the urethra into the bladder or come out the
front.That means that the patient would have to squeeze tight his
urethral meatus(the opening of the urethra in the penis) to prevent
the gel from coming out during the massage;sort of awkward to
squeeze with one hand and massage with the other.

-Most importantly, the greater distribution will cause a greater
degree of absorption of the material thus greatly enhancing the
potential for systemic absorption and thus hypotension and systemic
side effects.
-preservtion of a liquid in plastic creates problems of absorption
& degradation of the material by the plastic.

A very significant aspect that people have significantly missed here however is the Irwin-Urology-torch-bearer-Goldstein: he is the one that said MUSE /Alprostadil doesn't work very well in the urethra and
here he is advising HVSF about how to administer Alprostadil though
the urethra!!!!! Alprostadil in the urethra does the same thing whether ina pellet or a liquid! Overall there is now something fishy
about Barrons stories on Padma Nathan and Goldstein and Barrons alleged penchant of trying to short stocks: Look at Organogenesis who only last week was reccommended as a short by Barrons and now the FDA
panel approved it. I am sure you 'll see a big short squeeze on Organogenesis shorts tomorrow. Similar to the one I think that Vivus shorts will get,..one day..g.

-one final point:other patent attorneys or interested
parties/potential HVSF investors must have looked at this: why is
HVSF languishing at 96 cents a share? Maybe somebody DID take Gene's
advice and forked over $100 to an attorney for a Vivus/HVSF patent
search and thus subsequently decided to dump HVSF shares at 96
cents!!

TA