Medindia

X

Reportlinker Adds Pharmaceutical Licensing Overview

Wednesday, April 7, 2010 Research News J E 4
Advertisement


NEW YORK, April 6 Reportlinker.com announces that a new market research report is available in its catalogue:

Pharmaceutical Licensing Overview

http://www.reportlinker.com/p0186164/Pharmaceutical-Licensing-Overview.html

Introduction

Big Pharma continues to restructure its internal R&D departments as part of widespread cost-cutting measures to help reduce the impact of the impending 2011 patent cliff. To fill pipeline voids with new products, companies continue to make acquisitions and form partnerships with small pharma, biotech companies and academia, although the relationships between each are becoming increasingly dynamic.

Scope

*Overview of Big Pharma's current and anticipated future reliance on externally sourced products

*Overview of drivers and resistors of licensing deals and an assessment of key trends and factors that will shape the future make-up of licensing

*Analysis of key product deals during 2008-09, analyzing trends for in-licensing, out-licensing and manufacturing/supply arrangements

*Assessment of drug discovery and technology deals made by the top 10 pharmaceutical companies during 2008-09

Highlights

The number of in-licensing deals in 2009 increased by 12% over 2008, confirming that Big Pharma is actively seeking acquisitions and licensing agreements as a more cost-effective means of gaining access to novel products than carrying out extensive in-house R&D.

Although deals for drugs at the earliest stages of development accounted for almost 60% of all product in-licensing deals analyzed, Big Pharma greatly increased its focus on Phase II and III products in 2009 as it looks to offset the 2011 patent cliff by incorporating more advanced-stage products into its pipelines to enhance short/mid-term growth.

GlaxoSmithKline was by far the most active Big Pharma player. While many of its Big Pharma peers have participated in large M&A deals over the past 2 years, GlaxoSmithKline has thus far preferred to focus on incorporating externally acquired products into its pipeline.

Reasons to Purchase

*Appreciate the drivers and resistors companies face when licensing products, and the resultant strategies some companies are employing

*Identify suitable pharma partners to target when considering out-licensing your technologies and products

*Understand the direction the constantly evolving pharmaceutical licensing landscape is moving in order to identify the best strategies to succeed

ABOUT DATAMONITOR HEALTHCARE 2

About the Healthcare Strategic Analysis Team 2

Geographic specific reports: 2

Global issue reports: 2

1. About This Report 3

Chapter structure 4

Executive summary 4

Licensing trends overview 4

Evolving trends in the licensing landscape 4

Product licensing deals and trends 4

Technology licensing deals and trends 4

Bibliography 4

Contributing experts 5

Related reports 5

Upcoming related reports 5

2. Executive Summary 6

Strategic scoping and focus 6

Key findings 6

Key definitions 8

Deal definitions 8

Company classifications 8

Explanation of launch/core/expiry analysis 8

TABLE OF CONTENTS 9

3. Licensing Trends Overview 10

Key findings 10

Big Pharma trends 11

Big Pharma's reliance on externally sourced products drives sales growth 11

Big Pharma's sourcing of external products is set to grow 12

AstraZeneca to become more reliant on in-licensed products as internal products face generic competition 13

Abbott's recent M&A activity will reduce reliance on in-licensed products 14

Pfizer's acquisition of Wyeth will see it more reliant on sales from in-licensed products 15

Licensing deal trends 17

Annual change in deal activity 17

Big Pharma increases number of in-licensing deals during 2009 17

Cash-rich Big Pharma capitalized on economic situation through second half of 2009 18

Deals by subject 19

The majority of Big Pharma's licensing activity focuses on deals for drug candidates 19

Deals by company 20

GlaxoSmithKline was the most active Big Pharma player 20

GlaxoSmithKline raised its level of in-licensing activity in the second half of 2009 21

Eli Lilly to focus on internal R&D capabilities rather than externally-sourced products 22

4. Evolving Trends in the Licensing Landscape 23

Key findings 23

Introduction 24

Both Pharma and Biotech face the same core challenges 24

Drivers and resistors of licensing 25

Big Pharma's internal R&D crisis drives licensing quest 26

Poor returns from Pharma's internal R&D the confounding issue 26

Widespread cost-saving measures and essential refocusing central to Big Pharma's streamlined R&D 27

Biopharma's needs to collaborate are manifold 27

Big Pharma's cash and expertise is essential to advance Biopharma's pipeline candidates 28

Alliances allow companies to share the cost and inherent risks of drug development 28

Accessing external resources and capabilities 29

Future outlook for licensing deals 30

Big Pharma evolution 30

Partnership agreements become more intricate as licensees look to share development risk 30

How far can Big Pharma take its cost-cutting strategies? 30

Big Pharma's near-term focus 32

Late-and mid-stage deal activity set to increase as Pharma looks to offset the patent cliff 32

Deals with academia to multiply and become more complex 33

Pharma will turn increasingly to universities for early-stage innovation 33

Closer collaboration will reduce academic caution 34

Niche indications and orphan drugs are attractive licensing propositions 35

Smaller patient populations offset by attractive economic incentives 35

GlaxoSmithKline and Pfizer show greater concentration on orphan drugs 36

Push towards personalized medicine will shape technology deals 36

Strategic licensing options available for Pharma in growing diagnostics market 36

Big Pharma out-licensing to increase as internal R&D focus is realigned 38

Big Pharma divestitures could represent opportunities for smaller companies 38

Early-stage deal structure changes highlight Big Pharma's aversion to shouldering risk 39

Smaller upfront fees and additional milestone payments replace large opening values for riskier early-stage products 39

Option-based deals - a low-cost method of securing rights to potentially innovative early-stage products 40

Big Pharma's specialist external arms represent an alternative way to invest in and incorporate innovation 42

Big Pharma venture and option funds provide another route to team up with biotechs 42

GlaxoSmithKline's Centre of Excellence for External Drug Discovery focuses on option-based deals 43

Focus on emerging markets will increase 43

Regional rights sought to fuel push into emerging markets 43

Asia to become a key source of innovation in years to come 44

5. Product Licensing Deals and Trends 45

Key findings 45

Pharmaceutical licensing trends 46

In-licensing trends 46

Deals by primary goal 46

Research and discovery and product license deals most popular deal types for Big Pharma 46

Deals by therapy area 47

Infectious diseases is the most common therapy area for Big Pharma's product in-licensing deals 47

Influenza vaccine developments head anti-infective in-licensing deals 49

Central nervous system deals focus on the emergence of biologic treatments for Alzheimer's disease and pain 50

GlaxoSmithKline and Sanofi-Aventis up their focus on in-licensing oncology candidates in 2009 52

Deals by stage of development 54

Research/discovery stage products represent more than a third of all product in-licensing deals made by Big Pharma 54

Big Pharma moves its attention to in-licensing products at more advanced stages of development 55

Full license agreements form the majority of clinical stage product in-licensing deals 56

Marketing, promotion and distribution deals most commonly associated with marketed products 57

Deals by value - upfront fee paid 57

A premium upfront fee is standard for drug candidates that have reached Phase III development 57

Deals for central nervous system drugs commanded the highest upfront fees during 2008-09 58

Deals by drug type 60

Small molecules remain the main target of in-licensing deals amid increasing focus on biologics 60

Pfizer leads the way in stem cell therapy deals as Big Pharma generally refrains from mass investment 62

Deals by leading dealmakers 63

GlaxoSmithKline leads the field in terms of product in-licensing deals 63

Abbott and Roche restrict product licensing deals as attention turns to mega-merger activity 64

Eli Lilly, Sanofi-Aventis and Roche focus on securing the full licensing rights to a product 65

Johnson & Johnson ties up the greatest proportion of research and discovery deals 65

All Big Pharma companies in-license products across a range of therapy areas 67

Roche and Eli Lilly's in-licensing deals focus on small molecules with biologic candidates largely acquired through M&A activity 69

GlaxoSmithKline focuses on acquiring vaccines while Sanofi-Aventis leads the way in monoclonal antibody deals 70

Deals by source company type 72

The smallest pharma/biotech companies are the source of most in-licensed products 72

Vast majority of deals with mid-sized and fellow Big Pharma companies are for marketing rights 73

Deals by region 74

2009 saw a significant increase in product in-licensing deals for specific regions 74

Asia expected to become a key source of innovation in years to come 75

Out-licensing trends 76

Deals by primary goal and region 76

More than half of Big Pharma's product out-licensing deals are for marketing/promotion/distribution purposes 76

Leading dealmaker trends 77

GlaxoSmithKline and Pfizer more than double product out-licensing activity in 2009 77

Marketed products accounted for over half of all out-licensed products 78

Novartis largely out-licensed commercially-ready products for co-promotional reasons 79

GlaxoSmithKline divests US rights for Wellbutrin XL to Biovail for $510m 80

Out-licensing agreements for clinical-stage products 80

Innovative risk-mitigation deal struck by Eli Lilly for Alzheimer's disease candidates 81

Pfizer out-licenses products following R&D prioritization 82

Manufacturing and supply deals 84

Deals by leading dealmakers 84

Sanofi-Aventis signed the most manufacturing/supply product agreements 84

Eli Lilly extends previous alliance with Amylin to include supply of a once-weekly diabetes product 85

Leading source companies 86

Lonza emerges as a key partner for Big Pharma's outsourced manufacturing 86

6. Technology Licensing Deals and Trends 87

Key findings 87

Technology licensing trends 88

Trends in technology deals 90

Focus of technology 90

The majority of deals are for drug discovery and diagnostic technologies 90

Diagnostic technology deals 91

Drive towards personalized medicine results in numerous deals for diagnostics 91

Biomarkers seen as a tool to enhance clinical development 91

Deals to identify companion biomarkers for cancer subtypes facilitates move towards targeted therapies 92

Drug discovery technologies 93

An array of technologies are available to increase drug discovery productivity 93

Sanofi-Aventis gains access to a number of biopharmaceutical discovery/development platforms 94

Assay/screening is high on GlaxoSmithKline's agenda 95

Bioinformatics software designed to improve internal efficiencies of drug development 96

Drug delivery technologies 96

Novel delivery optimization technologies focus on improving delivery of biologic drugs 97

Drug production technologies 98

Big Pharma seeks high-yielding and more cost-effective biologic production processes 98

Medical device technology 98

Johnson & Johnson's specialist subsidiaries license catheter and stent device technologies for cardiovascular diseases 98

Leading technology dealmakers 99

Johnson & Johnson signed the most technology licensing deals with its specialist subsidiaries featuring heavily 99

Abbott focused on diagnostic technology deals supporting its market-leader status in the field 100

Sanofi-Aventis sought drug discovery technologies to help identify its next generation of revenue drivers 100

7. Bibliography 101

Company press releases 101

Other web-based articles 104

Other sources 105

Datamonitor reports 105

APPENDIX 107

Company classification 107

Contributing experts 110

About Datamonitor 111

About Datamonitor Healthcare 111

About the Healthcare Strategic Analysis team 111

Geographic specific reports: 112

Global issue reports: 112

Datamonitor consulting 112

Disclaimer 114

List of Tables

Table 1: Big Pharma's influenza vaccine in-licensing deals, 2008-09 49

Table 2: Big Pharma's central nervous system biologics in-licensing deals, 2008-09 50

Table 3: Sanofi-Aventis's oncology product in-licensing deals, 2009 53

Table 4: Leading central nervous system product in-licensing deals by upfront fee and value, 2008-09 59

Table 5: All 235 product in-licensing deals performed by the top 10 pharma companies by type, 2008-09 62

Table 6: Big Pharma's South and Central American product in-licensing deals, 2008-09 75

Table 7: Big Pharma's clinical-stage drug out-licensing deals, 2008-09 81

Table 8: Select diagnostic technology licensing deals made by the top 10 pharma companies, 2008-09 92

Table 9: Top 150 pharmaceutical companies in terms of 2008 sales 107

List of Figures

Figure 1: The PharmaVitae Explorer 3

Figure 2: Sales forecast dynamics of the top 10 pharma companies, 2009-2014 11

Figure 3: Top 10 pharma companies' reliance on externally sourced products, 2002-2014 12

Figure 4: AstraZeneca's prescription pharmaceutical sales by source ($m), 2009-2014 13

Figure 5: Abbott's pre-Solvay acquisition prescription pharmaceutical sales by source ($m), 2009-2014 14

Figure 6: Pfizer, Wyeth, and combined Pfizer-Wyeth reliance on externally sourced products, 2002-2014 16

Figure 7: Licensing deals performed by the top 10 pharma companies, 2008-09 17

Figure 8: Licensing deals performed by the top 10 pharma companies by quarter, 2008-09 18

Figure 9: Subject of licensing deals performed by the top 10 pharma companies, 2008-09 19

Figure 10: In-licensing deals performed by the top 10 pharma companies by category, 2008-09 20

Figure 11: In-licensing deals performed by the top 10 pharma companies by quarter, 2008-09 21

Figure 12: The key drivers and resistors facing licensees and licensors in today's pharmaceutical industry 25

Figure 13: The growing cost of drug discovery and allocation of R&D investment by function (%), 1975-2008 26

Figure 14: Stage of development at signing for all 235 in-licensing product deals performed by the top 10 pharma companies, 2008-09 32

Figure 15: Primary goal of all 235 product in-licensing deals performed by the top 10 pharma companies, 2008-09 46

Figure 16: Therapy area focus for all 235 product in-licensing deals by the top 10 pharma companies, 2008-09 47

Figure 17: Therapy area focus for all 235 product in-licensing deals by the top 10 pharma companies, 2008 versus 2009 48

Figure 18: Big Pharma's oncology product in-licensing deals, 2008-09 52

Figure 19: Product in-licensing deals by stage of development at signing by the top 10 pharma companies, 2008-09 54

Figure 20: Comparison of product in-licensing deals by stage of development at signing by the top 10 pharma companies, 2008-09 55

Figure 21: Product in-licensing by stage of development at signing and primary goal by the top 10 pharma companies, 2008-09 56

Figure 22: Mean upfront fee value ($m) by stage of development at signing for all in-licensing product deals performed by the top 10 pharma companies, 2008-09 58

Figure 23: All 235 product in-licensing deals performed by the top 10 pharma companies by type, 2008-09 60

Figure 24: All 235 product in-licensing deals performed by the top 10 pharma companies by type and quarter, 2008-09 61

Figure 25: Product in-licensing deals performed by the top 10 pharma companies, 2008-09 63

Figure 26: Primary goal of all 235 product in-licensing deals performed by the top 10 pharma companies, 2008-09 65

Figure 27: Stage of development of all 235 product in-licensing deals performed by the top 10 pharma companies, 2008-09 66

Figure 28: Therapy area of all 235 product in-licensing deals performed by the top 10 pharma companies, 2008-09 67

Figure 29: Product type of all 235 product in-licensing deals performed by the top 10 pharma companies, 2008-09 69

Figure 30: Biologic product in-licensing deals performed by the top 10 pharma companies by type, 2008-09 70

Figure 31: Source company of all 235 product in-licensing deals performed by the top 10 pharma companies, 2008-09 72

Figure 32: Source company and primary goal of all 235 product in-licensing deals performed by the top 10 pharma companies, 2008-09 73

Figure 33: Product in-licensing deals performed by the top 10 pharma companies by region, 2008-09 74

Figure 34: Primary goal of all 94 product out-licensing deals performed by the top 10 pharma companies, 2008-09 76

Figure 35: Product out-licensing deals performed by the top 10 pharma companies, 2008-09 77

Figure 36: All 94 product out-licensing deals performed by the top 10 pharma companies by stage of development, 2008-09 78

Figure 37: Novartis's key ex-US out-licensing regional co-promotion deals, 2008-09 79

Figure 38: All 17 manufacturing and supply licensing deals performed by the top 10 pharma companies, 2008-09 84

Figure 39: Application of different technology types across the drug development process 89

Figure 40: Focus of all 133 technology licensing deals performed by the top 10 pharma companies, 2008-09 90

Figure 41: Breakdown of drug discovery technology licensing deals performed by the top 10 pharma companies, 2008-09 93

Figure 42: The role of drug delivery technologies in a drug's lifecycle 97

Figure 43: Focus of all 133 technology licensing deals performed by the top 10 pharma companies, 2008-09 99

To order this report:

Pharmaceutical Industry: Pharmaceutical Licensing Overview

More Market Research Report

Check our Company Profile, SWOT and Revenue Analysis!

Contact Nicolas Bombourg Reportlinker Email: nbo@reportlinker.com US: (805)652-2626 Intl: +1 805-652-2626

SOURCE Reportlinker
Advertisement


Advertisement

You May Also Like

Advertisement
View All

Post your Comments

Comments should be on the topic and should not be abusive. The editorial team reserves the right to review and moderate the comments posted on the site.
User Avatar
* Your comment can be maximum of 2500 characters
I agree to the terms and conditions
s
Reportlinker Adds Therapeutic Vaccines: the Global...
S
The Children's Hospital 2010 Designer Show Home An...