Nanoscale solution to brand protection
process which can provde nanoscale printing, is reportedly working
with the manufacturer of a blockbuster drug to trial the encoding
of unit doses of the product for brand protection.
NanoInk director of business development Van Crocker says that because lithography and the fabricating of structures on the small scale makes them difficult to copy, NanoInk's covert offering has advantages over rival pharmaceutical brand protection solutions, according to a report from UK-based packaging consultancy PIRA.
Most existing pharmaceutical brand protection methods focus on authenticating pharmaceutical products at the package level, which has the advantage of helping track the history of a product while wholesalers, distributors, pharmacists can validate in the field.
But Crocker questions the effectiveness of overt or package level brand protection methods because it leaves goods vulnerable: for example individual unit doses can be switched within the tagged box or container.
"If counterfeiters can see it, they will defeat it. By encoding individual doses, without chemically damaging them, it makes it much more difficult to identify or copy," said Crocker.
Another key advantage of the NanoInk DPN technology is that it is not affected by the same regulatory requirements as chemical taggants.
According to Crocker, NanoInk's solution will better prevent counterfeiting because checking their codes easily authenticates products. If the code on individual doses is not what it should be, furthermore, it will be easy to spot diversion; and if it doesn't have a code, it will stand out as counterfeit.
"Any difference in code points to difficulties in the supply chain, including diversion. We see near term applications in the pharmaceutical industry, where there is a competitive edge because of a real need to combat counterfeiting."
According to World Health Organisation estimates, counterfeit medicines comprise 6 per cent of the world market, much higher in some areas, and include developed countries. In the US, for example, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has seen a four-fold increase in the number of counterfeit cases brought to its attention since the mid 1990s.
