 |
|
 |
Regulation & Policy |
|
|
Licensing Strategies - Examining Todays Pharmaceutical Licensing Trends
Publication Date November 2007
Publisher Datamonitor
Product Type Strategic Report
Pages 162
ISBN Number not applicable
Product Code DAT1245
|
|
|
Summary
Introduction
With Pharma struggling to maintain its pipelines and portfolios with products developed in-house, companies are increasingly turning to licensing. However, the search for late-stage developmental products is becoming tougher and more expensive, and companies are now looking towards licensing earlier-stage compounds.
Scope
- Overview of drivers and resistors of licensing deals, with recommendations and case study analysis of how companies can optimize the licensing process
- Examination of how to successfully navigate the licensing process, with analysis of how companies are looking to modernize their licensing strategies
- Analysis of key product deals during 2005-06, analyzing trends for in-licensing, co-development, out-licensing and marketing & promotion deals
- Assessment of drug discovery deals and technology deals, made by the top 20 pharmaceutical companies during 2005-06
Highlights
The constant demand for late-stage product candidates has led to spiraling deal costs. Therefore companies are now looking to in-license earlier-stage compounds, demonstrated by the recent resurgence in preclinical and Phase I licensing deals made by the top 20 pharmaceutical companies.
Companies facing patent expiries of key revenue drivers between 2006-12 have in-licensed products to counteract the ensuing sales erosion. However, this tactic is not expected produce a positive growth in the short term for all companies, although it will at least offset part of their revenue deficit.
During 2005-06, Novartis was the leading dealmaker, followed by Bayer-Schering, Roche, and J&J, with the top six companies responsible for 50% of all deals made by the leading 20 companies.
Reasons to Purchase
- Understand the opportunities and threats companies face when licensing their products, and the resultant strategies some companies are employing
- Identify suitable Pharma to target when considering licensing partners for your technologies and products
- Benchmark the success of your licensing strategy in order to improve future deal making success
|
Content
- Chapter 1 Executive Summary
- Scope Of The Report
- Interviewed Licensing Executives
- Chapter Summary
- Definitions
- Key Findings
- Chapter 2 Drivers And Resistors Of Licensing
- Both Pharma And Biotech Face The Same Challenges
- Drivers And Resistors Of Licensing Facing Pharma And Biotechs Today
- Drivers For The Licensee
- In-Licensing Compensates For Declining Internal R&D
- To Maintain And Build Upon A Company's Pipeline And Portfolio, Selective In-Licensing Is Frequently Employed
- Resistors For The Licensee
- In-Licensed Products Offer A Lower Roi Than Those Developed In-House
- Competition For Products Drives Up Costs Of Licensing Deals, So Pharma Turn To Licensing At An Early-Stage Of Development
- Drivers For The Licensor
- Generating Cash
- Sharing The Risk
- Accessing External Resources And Capabilities
- Resistors For The Licensor
- Loss Of Control
- Chapter 3 How To Successfully Navigate The Licensing Process
- The Key To Successful Licensing
- The Licensing Strategy
- Identifying An Opportunity
- In-Licensing - Evaluating Needs And Identifying Potential Candidates
- Out-Licensing - Overcoming Limitations
- Partners Of Choice
- Licensing Evaluations
- Signing The Deal And Managing The Alliance
- Alliance Management Structure
- Novel Twists On Licensing Strategies - Case Study Analysis
- Debiopharm - The Consummate Licensor
- Versant Ventures Joins In With Lilly's Chorus
- Pharma Looks Outside Its Traditional Portfolios
- Deal Values
- Deal Structures
- Upfront Payments
- Milestone Payments
- R&D Costs
- Royalties
- Deal Structure For Marketed Products
- Chapter 4 Product Licensing Deals And Trends
- Introduction
- Large Pharma Turn To In-Licensing To Compensate For Flagging Internal R&D Pipelines
- Reliance On Licensing Deals
- Eisai Forecast To Experience The Largest Increase In Dependency On In-Licensed Products
- Merck & Co. Set To Shift Its Dependence From In-House To In-Licensed Products By 2012
- Boehringer Ingelheim Set To Decrease Its Reliance On Externally Sourced Products
- Sanofi-Aventis Expected To Focus On In-Licensing In The Future
- In-Licensing Used To Offset Deficiencies In Internal Pipelines And Portfolios
- Deals Continue To Rise Through 2005-06
- Deals For Drugs In Clinical Development Predominate
- In-Licensing Forms The Majority Of Clinical Stage Drug Deals
- Licensing And Co-Development Deals Are Most Frequently For Compounds In Preclinical And Phase I Development
- Continued Rise In The Number Of Preclinical And Clinical Out-Licensing Deals By Big Pharma, But Deals For Marketed Drugs Fall Sharply
- Marketing, Promotion And Distribution Deals Most Commonly Associated With Marketed Products
- Leading Dealmakers
- Japanese Companies Raise Their Deal-Making Profile
- Leading In-Licensor Companies
- Astrazeneca In-Licenses To Strengthen Its Neuroscience Portfolio
- Novartis Carried Out The Greatest Number Of Phase I And Equal Highest Number Of Phase Iii Deals
- Leading Co-Developers
- Novartis And Bayer-Schering Performed The Largest Number Of Co-Development Deals
- Roche Continues To Strengthen Key Therapy Areas Through Co-Development
- Few Companies Entered Into Co-Development Deals For Drugs In Phase Iii Or Above
- More Co-Development Between Large Pharma And Large Pharma/Biotech Expected In The Future
- Companies Continue To Enter Deals For Anti-Infective And Oncology Products
- Resurgence In Deals For Oncology Drug Candidates
- Continued Rise In Anti-Infective And Cns Drug Deals
- Small Molecules Remain The Target Of Choice For Licensing Deals, But It Will Be The Biologics Driving Market Growth
- Leading Out-Licensors
- Bayer Schering Ag Out-License Products
- Bms Enters Out-Licensing Agreements To Share Risk And Costs
- Roche Performed The Highest Number Of Marketed Drug Deals
- Sanofi-Aventis Transfers Exubera Global Rights To Pfizer
- Big Pharma Predicted To Increase Out-Licensing Deals In The Future
- Marketing, Promotion And Distribution Deals
- Top Companies Predominantly Enter Marketing And Promotion Deals As Partners
- Abbott Uses Marketing Agreements To Bolster Its Position In The Respiratory Market
- Chugai Enhances Its Position In The Cardiovascular Market Through Marketing And Promotion Deals
- Cns And Anti-Infective Therapies Are The Most Popular Targets For Marketing And Promotion Deals
- Chapter 5 Technology Licensing Deals And Trends
- Introduction
- The Importance Of Technology Deals
- Drug Discovery Deals Take A Dive
- Leading Technology Dealmakers
- Merck & Co. Remains The Dominant Drug Discovery Dealmaker
- Biologic Technologies Overtake Small Molecules In Terms Of Drug Discovery Deals
- Therapeutic Antibodies And Recombinant Proteins Are The Key Biologic Technologies Targeted In Drug Discovery Deals
- Types Of Drug Discovery Deal
- Assays And Arrays
- Bioinformatics
- Biopharmaceutical Discovery And Development
- Chapter 6 Bibliography
- Datamonitor Reports
- Websites
- Publications And Online Articles
- Glossary Of Terms
- List Of Tables
- Table 1: Top 20 Pharmaceutical Companies, 2005-06
- Table 2: A Complementary Strategy - Strengths That Pharma And Biotechs Bring To A Licensing Deal
- Table 3: Ophthalmology Licensing Deals, 2005-06
- Table 4: Current Treatments For Amd, 2006
- Table 5: Proportion Of Upfront Payment In Terms Of Total Deal Costs Increases With Drug Development, 2005-06
- Table 6: Upfront And Milestone Payments Made By Gsk, 2005-06
- Table 7: Royalty Rates For In-Licensed Compounds
- Table 8: Top 20 Pharmaceutical Companies Forecast To Grow By Only An Average Of 2.6% Cagr, 2006-12
- Table 9: Product Deals Made By Japanese Headquartered Companies During 2005-06
- Table 10: Key Anti-Infective Drug In-Licensing And Co-Development Deals, 2005-06
- Table 11: Small Molecules Remain The Focus Of In-Licensing And Co-Development Deals During 2005-06
- Table 12: Drug Discovery And Delivery Deals Made By The Top 20 Pharmaceutical Companies, 2000-06
- Table 13: Leading Companies Licensing Biopharmaceutical Discovery And Development Technologies, 2005-06
- List Of Figures
- Figure 1: The Key Drivers And Resistors Facing Licensees And Licensors In Today's Pharmaceutical Industry
- Figure 2: Factors Responsible For Declining Revenues
- Figure 3: The Number Of In-Licensing Deals Rose Rapidly In 2005-06 Following Gradual Growth Over Previous Years
- Figure 4: Factors Determining A Licensee's Profits
- Figure 5: In-Licensed Products Offer A Lower Roi Than Those Developed In-House
- Figure 6: The Rising Cost Of In-Licensing, 2000-05
- Figure 7: Resurgence In The In-Licensing Of Preclinical Compounds, 2005-06
- Figure 8: The Pros And Cons Of In-Licensing At Different Stages Of Drug Development
- Figure 9: Factors Leading To Partnership Breakdown During Licensing Deals
- Figure 10: Overview Of The Pharmaceutical Licensing Process
- Figure 11: Key Elements That Need To Be Considered When Developing A Company's Licensing Strategy
- Figure 12: Key Factors To Be Evaluated When Identifying A Suitable In-Licensing Opportunity
- Figure 13: Merck & Co.'S 'Submit Your Discovery' Licensing Opportunity Profile Template
- Figure 14: Factors Which Can Tip The Balance In Favor Of Initiating Or Delaying The Out-Licensing Decision For A Licensor
- Figure 15: Partner's Of Choice Must Satisfy Several Hard And Soft Factors
- Figure 16: Novartis's Strategic Alliance Process
- Figure 17: Poor Deal Management Can Have Major Detrimental Effects On The Alliance Performance
- Figure 18: Debiopharm's Business Model
- Figure 19: Licensing Agreement Between Lilly's Chorus And Versant Ventures
- Figure 20: Weighing Up Upfront Payments
- Figure 21: Mean Upfront Payments For Licensing And Co-Development Deals Made By The Top 20 Pharma, 2005-06
- Figure 22: Total And Mean Upfront Payments By Licensor, 2005-06
- Figure 23: Mean Milestone Payments For Licensing And Co-Development Deals Made By The Top 20 Pharma, 2005-06
- Figure 24: Total And Mean Milestone Payments By Licensor, 2005-06
- Figure 25: Externally Developed Drugs Will Not Be Sufficient To Offset Revenue Losses From In-House Products For Gsk, 2006-12
- Figure 26: Top 20 Pharmaceutical Companies Forecast To Grow By Only An Average Of 2.6% Cagr, 2006-2012
- Figure 27: Companies Increasing Their In-Licensing Dependence During 2006-12
- Figure 28: Companies Decreasing Their In-Licensing Dependence During 2006-12
- Figure 29: In-Licensed Products Are Not Expected To Offset Revenue Decline From In-House Products For Eisai, 2006-12
- Figure 30: Externally Sourced Products Help Drive Merck & Co.'S Sales Growth During 2006-12
- Figure 31: Boehringer Ingelheim Set To Decrease Its Reliance On Externally Sourced Products During 2005-06
- Figure 32: Summary Of How Product Sourcing Is Forecast To Effect Company Sales By 2012
- Figure 33: In-Licensing Deals In 2005-06 Versus 2000-04
- Figure 34: In-Licensing Deals Are The Most Frequent Type Of Deal Carried Out By The Top 20 Pharmaceutical Companies, 2005-06
- Figure 35: Deals Per Stage Of Drug Development, 2005-06
- Figure 36: Development Stage Of Product's Licensed, By Type Of Deal, During 2005-06
- Figure 37: Licensing And Co-Development Deals Are Most Frequently Made For Compounds In Preclinical And Phase I Development, 2005-06
- Figure 38: Resurgence In The In-Licensing Of Preclinical Compounds, 2005-06
- Figure 39: Continued Rise In The Number Of Preclinical And Clinical Out-Licensing Deals, But Deals For Marketed Drugs Fall Sharply, 2000-06
- Figure 40: Definition Of Source And Partner Companies
- Figure 41: Novartis Was The Leading Dealmaker During 2005-06
- Figure 42: Novartis And Astrazeneca Were The Top In-Licensors During 2005-06
- Figure 43: Number Of In-Licensing Deals Versus Sales Growth, 2005-06
- Figure 44: Novartis And Bayer-Schering Were The Top Co-Developers During 2005-06
- Figure 45: The Ratio Of Deals Per Therapy Area Has Changed Little Between 2000-04 And 2005-06
- Figure 46: The Number Of Oncology And Anti-Infective In-Licensing And Co-Development Deals Grew Strongly During 2005-06
- Figure 47: Novartis Entered Into The Greatest Number Of Small Molecule In-Licensing And Co-Development Deals, 2005-06
- Figure 48: Significant Increases In Deal Numbers Were Made Across All Biologic Categories During 2005-06
- Figure 49: Bayer-Schering And Bms Were The Top Out-Licensors During 2005-06
- Figure 50: Out-Licensing Deal Territories, 2005-06
- Figure 51: Novartis Was The Leading Company To Enter Marketing, Promotion And Distribution Deals During 2005-06
- Figure 52: Marketing And Promotion Deals By Therapy Area, 2005-06
- Figure 53: The Drug Development Process, Including Stages Where Drug Delivery Technologies Can Be Applied
- Figure 54: Drug Discovery And Technology Deals Made By The Top 20 Pharmaceutical Companies, 2000-06
- Figure 55: Merck & Co. And Novartis Performed The Most Technology Deals During 2005-06
- Figure 56: Biologic Technologies Overtake Small Molecules In Terms Of Drug Discovery Deals, 2000-06
- Figure 57: Therapeutic Antibodies And Recombinant Proteins Were The Key Biologics Targeted In Drug Discovery Deals, 2005-06
- Figure 58: Drug Discovery Technologies, 2005-06
|
|
|
