Post on 02-Feb-2018
Life Sciences R&D:
Changing the Innovation Equation in IndiaDelivering Affordable Innovation
Through Global Partnerships
2011
1Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Disclaimer
This position paper, commissioned by the USA-India Chamber of Commerce
(USAIC) and prepared by The Boston Consulting Group (BCG), is being
furnished to the recipient for informational purposes only.
It does not constitute a recommendation to any party. The recipient should
conduct his own investigation and analyses of the information contained in this
document. No recipient is entitled to rely on the work contained in this document
for any purpose.
USAIC and BCG make no representation or warranties whatsoever with respect
to the position paper or any of the information herein or on omissions therefrom.
Neither USAIC or BCG nor their affiliates, directors, officers, or employees
accept any liability for any damages whatsoever arising from the use of this
document or its contents.
The recipient must not reproduce, disclose, or distribute this report or the
information contained therein without the express consent of USAIC or BCG.
2Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Position paper prepared by BCG for release at USAIC‟s
US-India BioPharma Summit in June 2011
The USA-India Chamber of Commerce mission is to provide a
proactive and professional platform for senior business
executives, academicians, investors, and high ranking policy
makers in the US and India to network, facilitate, and promote
trade, investments, and economic cooperation. USAIC‟s four
point agenda is: Trade, Investment, Policy, and Advocacy.
In cooperation with the industry, USAIC runs the following
industry focused councils:
• Biotech, Pharmaceuticals, and Healthcare Council
• US-India Investment Council (USIC)
• CIO Council
US-India BioPharma & Healthcare Summit, held annually in
Cambridge, MA, has created an innovation driven ecosystem
bringing together all stakeholders: healthcare and life sciences
executives, investors, policy makers, and academicians. The
annual Summit has become THE Global BioPharma for senior
executives focused on Drug Discovery & Development,
Licensing, Clinical Research, External Research, Healthcare,
Innovation, M&A, Deal Flow, and Emerging Markets.
The Summit helps facilitate collaborative research
partnerships, cross border investments, public-private-
academic partnerships, and new opportunities to take
business to the next level.
The Boston Consulting Group (BCG) is a global management
consulting firm and the world‟s leading advisor on business
strategy. We partner with clients in all sectors and regions to
identify their highest-value opportunities, address their most
critical challenges, and transform their businesses.
Our customized approach combines deep insight on the
dynamics of companies and markets, with close collaboration
at all levels of the client organization. This ensures our clients
achieve sustainable competitive advantage, build more
capable organizations, and secure lasting results.
BCG‟s Health Care practice is the fastest growing practice in
BCG and the second-largest industry practice globally, as well
as the largest practice in the US. A substantial portion of our
work is with the world‟s major Pharmaceutical and Biotech
companies, but our clients also include institutions across the
entire spectrum of the health care industry, including medical
technologies, payers, and providers.
The Health Care practice consists of over 100 partners with
experience of having completed over 1,900 assignments within
the last five years.
Founded in 1963, BCG is a private company with 74 offices in
42 countries. For more information, please visit www.bcg.com.
3Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
This Position Paper was commissioned by USA-India Chamber of Commerce and developed by BCG
for the US-India BioPharma & Healthcare Summit 2011.
The document is the culmination of a four month research effort to compile the latest trends in
BioPharma R&D sourcing and investments in India, and to analyze the opportunities for improving
R&D productivity by leveraging Indian opportunities. While the intent of the report is not to develop
detailed recommendations, we do propose a broad action agenda for different stakeholders. The
opportunity varies based on the starting position and ambition of the individual companies.
The report‟s articulation of the aspirations, potential roadblocks, opportunities, and imperatives for
Global BioPharma‟s R&D activities in India should provide the context to guide discussions among
stakeholders at the USAIC US-India BioPharma Summit 2011 to maximize the potential of the sector,
as well as act as a reference compendium for the latest state of the industry.
The report has been completed with the support of USA-India Chamber of Commerce. We would like
to especially thank Karun Rishi, President of USAIC, as well as the members of the advisory board
who participated in the research effort and helped enrich the report.
The project was managed by Bart Janssens, Simon Goodall, Sarwar Islam, and Kim Wagner, partners
in our India and US offices. We would like to recognize the contributions of Rahul Guha, Saurabh
Tayal, Kinjal Morakhia, and Gaurav Lal in developing this report. We would also like to thank the BCG
health care/innovation experts including Martin Silverstein, Valery Panier, Peter Tollman, John Wong,
Ulrik Schulze, and Philippe Guy, as well as Katie Sasser and Carolyn Noble for marketing support.
Preface
4Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Methodology adopted for development of the position paper
BioPharma R&D expert
interviews
• ~40 in-depth interviews
with individuals engaged in
BioPharma R&D activities
• Interviewees spanned:
– US, Europe, and Asia
– BioPharma industry,
government, academia,
and investors
Global BioPharma survey
• Survey conducted with
Western BioPharma to
identify levers to enhance
R&D activity in India
Indian BioPharma survey
• Survey conducted with
Indian research companies
to understand measures to
increase local innovation
Databases
• Use of databases
– Evaluate Pharma
– Pharmaprojects
– Datamonitor
Literature review
• Extensive literature
research including BCG
publications, analyst
reports, public resources
Interviews Surveys Secondary research
5Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Table of Contents
Executive Summary 6
Chapter 1: Global context and introduction 9
• Global BioPharma trends with implications for India 10
Chapter 2: India‟s potential role in addressing Global BioPharma R&D issues 15
• Overview of Indian R&D sourcing landscape 16
• Opportunities offered by India to address global challenges 19
Chapter 3: Ideas to leverage India for lowering “value invested” 20
• Enhancing scope of sourcing 22
• Establishing clinical hubs 28
• Generating greater value from collaborations 33
Chapter 4: Ideas to leverage India for improving “value generated” 37
• Developing ―nichebusters‖ 39
• Leveraging India for emerging technologies 43
Chapter 5: Stakeholder agenda and the “Inno-vision” for India 57
Appendix 62
• Meet the authors 63
6Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Executive summary
Global BioPharma R&D is at an important juncture today. The rate of innovation is declining, leading to
lower productivity and less innovation at higher cost. At the same time, opportunities are shifting to
emerging markets, making the ability to deliver cost-effective innovation a key success factor.
Companies are actively pursuing variabilization and externalization to complement in-house research
efforts to reduce the cost of innovation to keep up with this decline. India has emerged as an attractive
destination for sourcing R&D at lower costs, especially for chemistry and clinical research.
There still remains significant room for building upon this opportunity by expanding the scale and
scope of sourcing. Moreover, the business models can be optimized to drive closer interaction, thereby
driving greater results.
The productivity crisis, however, cannot be solved by addressing the cost aspect only. India cannot
contribute holistically to addressing the needs of the BioPharma industry unless there is innovative
drug discovery being conducted there. An initial step could be to leverage the cost advantage in India
to open up newer avenues of growth by enabling development of products previously uneconomical
for Global BioPharma. Further, in research, India can focus on emerging technologies such as
bioinformatics, nanotechnologies, and stem cell research. This would help overcome late-mover
disadvantage and build a competitive position leveraging existing strengths in IT, engineering, or
flexible policies.
While the government has taken concrete measures over the last decade to establish an innovation
ecosystem, Indian stakeholders have to accelerate their capability and capacity building to enable
Global BioPharma to develop an India innovation strategy.
7Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Our key belief: More to enhancing R&D productivity than
lowering costs
Innovation output as measured by
number of new molecules/
biologicals launched in market
Input resources required to bring a
single drug to market,
incorporating the cost of failure
Value
generated
Value
invested
R&D
Productivity =
Source: BCG analysis
8Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
India offers many opportunities to improve R&D productivityHowever aspirations, business models, and commitments need to be aligned to capture value
Source: BCG analysis
Value invested
• Expand scope of sourcing beyond chemistry and clinical to
discovery to leverage cost arbitrage between India and
Western markets
• Establish clinical hubs in India to benefit from large
treatment naïve patient populations
• Generate greater value from collaborations by investing in
improving productivity of Indian partners to develop a low-
cost, high-quality talent pool
Value
generated
Value
invested
R&D
Productivity =
Value generated
• Leverage India‘s low cost advantage to develop
―nichebusters‖ and expand segments targeted
• Pursue emerging technologies where India has
demonstrated strengths
While improving “value generated” is a long-term opportunity,
lowering “value invested” is short-medium term
Chapter 1
Global context and introduction
10Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
R&D productivity is on the decline
NMEs per $B R&D spent (inflation adjusted)
Structure of
DNA
Restriction
enzymes
DNA
sequencing
Recombinant
DNA
Human
insulin
Dolly the
Sheep
Human
genome v1
FDA tightens regulation
post thalidomide
FDA clears backlog following
PDUFA regulations and
perhaps relaxes on HIV drugs
0.1
1
10
100
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Note: R&D costs are estimated from PhRMA annual survey 2009; NMEs are the total number of small molecule and biologic approvals by the FDASource: Bernstein Research ―The Long View – R&D Productivity‖ (September 30, 2010)
11Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Decline in R&D productivity is driven by both a fall in value
generated and an increase in value invested
Value invested
• Clinical timelines are increasing
• Success rates are declining and have halved since 1990s
• R&D costs are rising, with a three-fold increase over the
last decade
Value
generated
Value
invested
R&D
Productivity =
Source: BCG analysis
Value generated
• Number of drugs submissions for regulatory approval has
been flat
• Higher regulatory hurdles, lowering drugs approved
• Downward trend forecasted in peak sales
12Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Pipeline approved till 2007 (%)
50
40
30
20
10
0
Year of pipeline snapshot
-12%
20022
15%
1997
28%
Lower innovation, higher regulatory hurdles and reduced
sales realization are driving lower “value generated”
N=116 N=86
N = xx # Approved drugs
Average peak sales ($M)
1,500
1,000
500
0
Year of launch
2013
264
2012
418
2011
687
2010
707
2009
977
NME1 applications submitted
60
40
20
0
Year
2010
23
2009
37
2008
34
2007
35
2006
26
2005
38
1. NME – New Molecular Entity (includes NDAs and BLAs) 2. Full pipeline lifecycle data required hence the age of the sample.Note: Analysis includes chemical new molecular entities that were in Phase II to pre-registration pipeline in 1997 and 2002 respectively. Approval till 2007 has been considered for both 1997 and 2002 pipelines. Does not include biologics.Source: CDER - FDA, Parexel Bio/Pharmaceutical R&D statistical sourcebook 2010/11, Evaluate Pharma, BCG Analysis
Declining approvals
for new chemical entities
Downward trend
forecasted in peak sales
Drugs submitted
for approval has been flat
13Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
00s
Mean development time in years
8
6
4
7.4
90s
6.3
80s
5.5
70s
4.4
60s
2.5
Year
10s
0
2
7.2
Increasing development time and declining success rates
are escalating “value invested”
69% 46%
28%
66%
56%
86%
93% 9%59%
18%
Ph
as
e I
Ph
as
e II
Ph
as
e III
Ph
as
e IV
Lau
nc
h
1990s
2000s
Cumulative success rate
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
202020102000199019801970
Cost per molecule (incl. cost of failure) ($M)
4,000
1979
$100M
1991
$300M
2000
$800M
2010
$2300M
20151
$3800M
1. Theoretical extrapolation at historical CAGR of 10.6%Source: Tufts CSDD; Perexel Bio/Pharmaceutical R&D statistical sourcebooks; CMR; BCG analysis
Expanding clinical timelines Deteriorating success rates Rising R&D costs
14Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Pharma
Co
Variabilization is pursued when work can be
more efficiently distributed to network
partners than performed in-house• Need for transforming fixed costs into variable
costs as cost of drug development is on an upward
trend
Diversification is pursued within a company
to broaden its portfolio• Increasing importance of a broad diverse portfolio
as more and more payers look for low-cost
generics and preventive vaccines as complements
to innovative pharmaceuticals
1
2
Externalization is pursued to diversify
efforts and share risk with partners• Access to alternative sources of innovation to
complement in-house output as R&D productivity
is on the decline
3
2
3
Global BioPharma companies are adopting a variety of
approaches to improve R&D productivity
1
Source: BCG analysis
Chapter 2
India‟s potential role in addressing global BioPharma R&D issues
16Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Share of PhRMA Member R&D outside US (2002 vs. 2009)
Share of India in global R&D spending increased by more
than ten times between 2002-2009
Note: R&D outside US includes expenditures outside the United States by US-owned PhRMA member companies and R&D conducted abroad by the US divisions of foreign-owned PhRMAmember companies. R&D performed abroad by the foreign divisions of foreign-owned PhRMA member companies is excluded. Domestic R&D, however, includes R&D expenditures within the United States by all PhRMA member companies.Source: Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) Industry Profiles 2011 and 2004, BCG analysis
2009
1.1%
2002
0.1%
Share
Industry R&D
spending
in US ($B)
2002 2009
25.7 35.4
83% 76%
Rest of Europe
„02 - 2.0%
„09 - 8.3%
Western
Europe „02 -
73.1%
„09 - 68.9%
Middle East
and Africa
„02 - 0.7%
„09 - 1.5%
Other Asia Pac
„02 - 1.5%
„09 - 4.7%
Japan
„02 - 13.2%
„09 - 6.1%
Australia and NZ
„02 - 1.5%
„09 - 1.6%Latin
America
„02 - 2.1%
„09 - 3.7%
Canada
„02 - 5.7%
„09 - 4.0%
India
Industry R&D
spending
outside US ($B)
2002 2009
5.3 11.0
17% 24%
17Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
15
Moderately satisfied 42
Satisfied 30
Very satisfied 0
Respondents (%)
100806040200
Total 100
Not satisfied at all 12
Minimally satisfied
Global BioPharma expect to increase R&D activities in India
as existing R&D alliances have delivered satisfactory results
Source: BCG US and Europe Pharma companies Survey Mar 2011 (N = 33)
~75% of respondents expect
to increase R&D activities in India
Level of satisfaction for Global Pharma
with current R&D partnerships in India
>70% of Global BioPharma executives
satisfied with R&D alliances in India
Respondents (%)
100806040200
Total 100
Reduce significantly 3
Reduce somewhat 3
Stay the same 18
Increase somewhat 55
Increase significantly 21
Expected change in level of R&D
activities in India by Global Pharma
18Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
However, Indian R&D sourcing market has not grown
as per expectations
Source: Frost &Sullivan projections quoted by India Brand Equity Foundation and other press articles 2007, Avendus Capital report on Pharma, January 2011, Frost & Sullivan website, BCG analysis
At ~$0.9B, the Indian R&D sourcing industry in 2010 is half of what it was projected to be
0.5
0.0
Current
0.9
Indian R&D sourcing market in 2010 in $B
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
Projected
2.0
19Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
India offers many opportunities to improve R&D productivityHowever, aspirations, business models, and commitments need to be aligned to capture value
Source: BCG analysis
Value invested
• Expand scope of sourcing beyond chemistry and clinical
to discovery to leverage cost arbitrage between India and
Western markets
• Establish clinical hubs in India to benefit from large
treatment naïve patient populations
• Generate greater value from collaborations by investing
in improving productivity of Indian partners to develop a
low-cost, high-quality talent pool
Value
generated
Value
invested
R&D
Productivity =
Value generated
• Leverage India‘s low cost advantage to develop
―nichebusters‖ and expand segments targeted
• Pursue emerging technologies where India has
demonstrated strengths
4a
4b
3a
3b
3c
X refers to Chapter number and
y to sub-section in this reportXy
While improving “value generated” is a long-term opportunity,
lowering “value invested” is short-medium term
Chapter 3
Ideas to leverage India for lowering “value invested”
21Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Summary: Ideas to lower “value invested”
Enhance scope
of sourcing
Expand sourcing beyond chemistry and clinical research to sourcing discovery
activities to leverage cost arbitrage across the value chain
• MNCs have expressed satisfaction with sourcing from India and expect an increase
in activities but sourcing is largely concentrated in chemistry and clinical research
• Indian research providers have invested in building capabilities across the value
chain and the experience of companies with novel drug discovery in India has been
positive
Establish
clinical hubs
Leverage India‟s clinical offering to conduct cost effective Proof of Concept
facilitating greater innovation at the same cost
• India has a demonstrated track record with ~1,300 clinical trials conducted since
2005
• Large treatment naïve patients pools drive a 4x faster recruitment of patients
• Cost per patient is half in India as compared to Western countries
Generate
greater value
from
collaborations
Transition from a vendor model to a collaborative partnership
• Investment in partner development and long-term commitment identified as critical
success factors to delivering innovation
• Transactional vendor model may be suitable for extracting cost-based value, but is
inadequate for conducting innovative activities
3a
3b
3c
22Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
73
Respondents (%)
8040 60200
Capabilities in new TAs 15
Talent 48
Infrastructure set-up 52
Data mgmt / informatics 55
Access to patient pool 70
Low cost
Global BioPharma still leverages India largely for
low cost activities
―Which of the following capabilities do you expect your
industry R&D partner(s) in India to bring to your relationship?‖
Source: BCG US and Europe Pharma companies Survey, Mar 2011 (N = 33); Expert interviews
3a
“For us, the reason for sourcing from India is not to generate new IP.
It is driven primarily by cost differential.”
- SVP R&D, MNC biotech company
23Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Sourcing from India concentrated in chemistry and clinical
research; some emerging collaborations in biology
Biology Research – Chemistry ClinicalPre-
clinicalTarget
identification
Target
validation
Compoundgeneration
& assay dev Screening
Lead
optimizationPh I Ph II Ph III Data mgmt
Syngene,
Divi‘s
Ranbaxy
Tata Consultancy Services
Advinus
Aurigene
Divi‘s
Jubilant
Syngene
Captive
In-house
Aurigene
Jubilant, Syngene Jubilant
Jubilant
Captive research and process center Biocon
Suven Tata Consultancy Services
Piramal
Strands Zydus
Jubilant JV with Jubilant (Vanthys)
Biocon BMS Research Center Accenture
Captive centre
SiroClinpharm, Cognizant, Biocon
TCG Life Sciences
GVK BIO
SAI Advantium
Source: Literature review, BCG analysis
3a
24Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
2025202020152010
Costs indexed to 2010 costs for US/Europe
200
150
100
50
0
~50%
~20%
~35%
~60%
Cost advantage is likely to remain significant at least for the
next five to ten years
IndiaUS / Europe
Assumptions: Increase in labor costs for R&D is same as overall wage inflation; overhead costs are not included in the above calculations.Source: EIU, Expert interviews, BCG case experience, BCG analysis
3a
25Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Less common service offerings, limited collaborations reported
Significant potential exists to increase depth and breadth of
activities sourced from India
Source: BCG analysis
Most common service offerings, multiple collaborations reported
Emerging service offerings,hardly observed
Medicinal chemistry (SAR)Combinatorial chemistry
and library generation
Preclinical
development
Lead
optimization
Lead
generation
Assay
development &
HT screening
Target ID &
validation
Intermediates and scale-up
Toxicology
Research PK Preclinical DMPK
In vivo pharmacology (animal models)
In vitro assays and cell lines
Bioinformatics
Protein expression
Protein crystallization and X-ray
Computational chemistry and structure-based design
Natural products (extracts and lead structures)
Structural biology
Target validation(animal models)
High Throughput screening
3a
26Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Indian research companies have invested in broadening
service offerings across the value chainC
ap
ab
ilit
y o
f In
dia
n r
es
ea
rch
in
du
str
y
Custom
synthesis &
manufacturing;
analytical
services
Medicinal and
combinatorial
chemistry
Pre-clinical and
toxicologyClinical research
and data
management
Source: Company websites, BCG analysis
Time frame
Illustrative
Informatics and
genomic
applicationsMolecular
modeling and
molecular biology
Widely available
services
3a
27Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Several companies have sourced early discovery activities
from India and have expressed satisfaction with results
Source: Expert interviews, Press releases, BCG Analysis
3a
“Our partnership in India has exceeded expectations. We were initially planning on
conducting only some back-up programs in India, but now we are doing novel drug
discovery.”
- VP R&D, Global BioPharma
“Our collaboration has resulted in the identification of promising pre-clinical candidates in
important therapeutic areas.”
- SVP R&D, Global BioPharma
“We have been impressed by the quality of the science and the progress made to date by
the Indian partner team on our ongoing discovery program.” - VP R&D, Global BioPharma
Extension of existing agreements and increase
in scope bears testimony to satisfactory results
28Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
India is emerging as a popular clinical trials destination ~1,300 global clinical trials conducted since 2005
Novo
Nordisk
26
Amgen
37
Biogen
Idec
40
BI
43
AZ Merck
20
Bayer
20
Roche
22
Number of global trials with sites in India
(Total between Jan 2005 and Jan 2011)
400
300
200
100
0
Others
390
Abbott
16
43
BMS
49
SA
52
Novartis
62
Eli Lilly
63
GSK
73
Pfizer
126
Univ./
Non
profit
306
Note: GSK – GlaxoSmithKline, SA – Sanofi Aventis, AZ – Astra Zeneca, BMS – Bristol-Myers Squibb, BI – Boehringer Ingelheim; Phase I/II clubbed in Phase II, Phase II/III clubbed with Phase IIISource: ClinicalTrials.gov
Phase IIPhase IIIPhase IV Phase I
3b
29Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Examples from vendor case studies
Indian sites recruit ~4 times faster than average global sites
Note: H&N – Head and neckSource: Company interviews, BCG analysis
Number of patients/site/month
5
15
10
0
Ulcerative
Colitis
Irritable
Bowel
Syndrome
StrokeDiabetesOsteoporosis Myocardial
Infarction
Non-Small-
Cell Lung
Carcinoma
H&N CancerMetast.
Breast
Cancer
Global sites
Indian sites
3b
On average 4x faster recruitment in Indian sites
Indication-specific speed ranges between 2x and 6x
30Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Faster recruitment is driven by presence
of large patient populations
Diabetes Cancer Coronary heart disease
Patients (#K)
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
0
2015
45,809
2010
37,672
500
1,500
1,000
0
2015
1,061
2010
980
Patients (#K) Patients (#K)
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
0
2015
61,522
2010
46,969
Source: Datamonitor National Health Profile 2009
3b
31Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Observed benefits generate several opportunities to
explore
Lower unit cost
Indian cost/patient is less
than half of global cost
Accelerating PoC1 go/no-go decisions at same total
cost• Opportunity to conduct twice as many PoC trials at same
total cost
• Opportunity to reduce global bottlenecks in conducting PoC
trial due to significantly faster recruitment
• ―Increased ability to recruit ‗treatment naïve‘ patient
populations to drive more robust Proof of Concept
decisions.‖ - President, R&D, Global Pharma
Faster recruitment
Speed of recruitment in
Indian sites is ~4 times
faster than average global
sites
Improving feasibility and economics for “nichebuster”
development• Faster patient enrollment than developed countries for rare
diseases at lower cost
• US-based MNC conducted study on an orphan drug
indication ―Ophthalmology/Uveitis‖ with ~50% patients
recruited from India
• OneWorld Health got approval for Paromomycin
Intramuscular injection for treatment of Visceral
Leishmaniasis with 100% patients recruited from India
Large diverse patient
pool
Large availability of
treatment naïve patients
1. PoC = Proof of ConceptSource: BCG analysis
3b
32Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Models are emerging where Global BioPharma partners
with an Indian research company for cost-effective PoC
Probability of technical success (%)
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Year 5Year 4Year 3Year 2Year 1
Source: In Vivo, May 2007, Company website
First human dose
Single dose
Safety study
Multiple dose
Safety study
PoC
First efficacy dose
PoC
• Longer time
• Higher costs
Working model of Vanthys Vanthys overview
Vanthys Standard industry program
• A 50:50 joint venture between Eli
Lilly and Jubilant
– Focused on establishing clinical
PoC as quickly and
inexpensively as possible
• Modeled after Chorus, an
autonomous unit of Eli Lilly, which
provides fast and efficient drug
development by leveraging external
contract partners
• Chorus is considered a successful
model and has been replicated
through Vanthys and Chorus
Resonance
3b
33Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
“There is a need to transition from a vendor-
based approach to true partnerships.
Partnerships need to have a more strategic
imperative.”– VP R&D, Global Pharma
“If an organization is just looking to source R&D
with no interaction, then the partnership will not
succeed.”– CEO, Indian contract research firm
“A model where a company is asked to develop a
drug and not given any support does not work
and is doomed to fail by its structure.”– CEO, Indian drug discovery company
Partnerships are gaining
in prominence globally…
…and a similar trend is expected in
India
There is a global move from sourcing models
to collaborative partnerships
Note: Figures exclude ‗don't knows,‘ blanks, ‗not outsourced‘ or partnerships between major PharmacosSource: BCG survey to top BioPharma companies conducted in ‗08/09, Expert interviews, BCG Analysis
Disc.Pre
Clinical
Pharm.
Devt.Clinical
Regul-
atory
Overall sourcing mix of external work (%)
100
80
60
40
20
0
47%33%11%
23%
26%
Vendor / transaction model
Partnering / Risk sharing
In-licensing
Academic networks
3c
34Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
% Respondents
604530150
Not enough great ideas 12%
Selecting the right
ideas to develop15%
Long development
timelines18%
Difference in execution
approach33%
Insufficient senior
management support36%
Lack of coordination with
alliance partners39%
No good way to measure
ROI accurately42%
Evolution from sourcing models toward collaborative
partnerships in India will help resolve bottlenecks
Source: BCG US and Europe Pharma companies Survey, Mar 2011 (N = 33), Expert interviews, BCG analysis
Obstacles faced by Global Pharma
in partnering with India
Need for better coordination and
agreed-upon execution approach
What obstacles do you face in
your R&D partnerships in India?
3c
“There has to be mutual agreement on execution
approach upfront and frequent communication
throughout the collaboration. Just giving a
problem and expecting an output at the end
will not work.”- SVP, Global Biotech
“The success of any collaboration lies in
commitment, knowledge sharing and shared
vision on both sides.”- MD, R&D centre, Global Pharma
“Commitment from Global Pharma at a senior
level is most important for partnerships. Unless
someone very senior like the CEO or head of
research supports it there will be resistance
internally.” - EVP R&D, Global Pharma
35Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Investment in partner development and commitment from
senior management critical to successful partnerships
Investment in
capability
building
―What will we
get out of this?‖
Long-term
commitment
from senior
leadership
―What do we
need to invest?‖
Shared
agenda
―What are we
looking for?‖
Source: Expert interviews, BCG analysis
3c
“A partner needs to bring a sustainable value proposition (technology,
capability etc). We are looking for a partner for drug discovery and not just a
low cost option.” - SVP R&D, Global Pharma
“Our productivity is one of the highest in the Global Pharma‟s R&D network.”- CEO, Indian drug discovery company
“It is important to ensure incentives are in place for the partner. We are helping
our partner develop world class capabilities.”- SVP R&D, Global Pharma
“Successful relationships are ones where we realize we need to invest early and
often, sometimes even put people on the ground. Efforts spent in educating the
partner have paid off.” - SVP R&D, Global Pharma
“The senior leadership teams have a strong working relationship, which is very
important to getting things done.”- SVP R&D, Global Pharma
“Unless someone senior enough supports the partnership, there will be
resistance. It is equally important to have commitment across levels.” - SVP R&D, Global Pharma
36Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Two kinds of partners are preferred by Global BioPharma:
Integrators or specialists
Source: Jefferies CRO Survey 2007, expert interviews, BCG analysis
Would you prefer to use several best-in-class providers for
a project or one full service firm?
0
41
59
25
100
One provider
with solid services
across the board
Respondents (%)
75
50
Several
best-in-class
providers
3c
“Initially we used an integrated service provider
because it is more convenient. However, it is
difficult for one CRO to be the best at everything
and we now work with several best in class
players.”– SVP R&D, Global Pharma
“There is clearly some benefit to scale and this
has probably dominated Pharma companies‟
preference to invest in few relationships.”
– VP R&D, Global Pharma
Chapter 4
Ideas to leverage India for improving “value generated”
38Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Summary: Ideas to improve “value generated”
Develop
“nichebusters”
Pursue opportunities previously uneconomical for Global BioPharma
• Current R&D model is too costly for development of ―nichebusters‖
• By combining early stage expertise of Global BioPharma with Indian service
providers‘ ability to bring innovation to market cost effectively, newer diseases can
be targeted
• Indian BioPharma developing innovative products in India could adopt a network
approach to optimize business model to deliver innovation faster and cheaper
Leverage
research
capabilities in
emerging
technologies
Tap India for emerging technologies where India has a competitive advantage
• Potential early mover advantage in technologies of the future
• Several new technologies are closely linked to information technology and
engineering where India has established strengths
– e.g., Bio-informatics, Nano bio-technology
• Further, India offers a policy environment where research can take place in select
areas
– e.g., Stem cell research
4a
4b
39Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Current R&D model is not suitable for “nichebusters;”
need for a low cost strategy to pursue these opportunities
Global Pharma looking for partners
for developing “nichebusters”2
Only 20% of drugs launched
by Global Pharma meet R&D costs
1. After-tax average PV of sales is ~$363M 2. Niche-busters refers to drugs for diseases with limited patient population 3. PoC – Proof of ConceptNote: Drug development costs represent after-tax out-of-pocket costs in year 2000 dollars for drugs introduced from 1990–94. The same analysis found that the total cost of developing a new drug was $1.3B in 2006. Average R&D costs include the cost of the approved medicines as well as those that fail to reach approval.Source: J. Vernon et. al., ―Drug Development Costs when Financial Risk is measured using the Fama-French Three Factor Model,‖ Unpublished Working Paper, 2008; J. DiMasi andH. Grabowski, ―The Cost of BioPharmaceutical R&D: Is Biotech Different?,‖ Managerial and Decision Economics, 2007, expert interviews, BCG analysis
After-tax present value of sales1 (M of year 2000 dollars)
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
-500
10987654321
New Rx drugs introduced between 1990-
1994, grouped by Tenths, by lifetime sales
After-tax average R&D
out-of-pocket costs
Need for low cost player with end-to-end
capabilities to make development of “niche-
busters” economically viable
4a
“We have projects with potential for success
which have been de-prioritized for cost reasons.
We are looking to monetize some of these
opportunities by partnering.”
– VP R&D, Global Pharma
“We are partnering with a Chinese company till
PoC.3 We retain the right to global
commercialization and the partner retains rights
to the local market.”
– SVP R&D, Global Pharma
40Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Indian Pharma strongly placed to take up
niche innovation programs
Competencies required from partner
playing to India‟s strengths
India with ~60% cost advantage
over traditional model
Global Pharma
Validated targets provided by
Global Pharma
Indian Pharma
Lead optimization to Proof of
Concept stage
Commercialization in India if
project is successful
10%
20
-60%
Drug discovery &
development in
India
Percentage
100
80
30%
60
Traditional
Global pharma
model
0
40
26%
74%
Cost of successCost of failure
Source: Expert interviews, Literature review, BCG analysis
4a
41Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Network model can help Indian Pharma in bringing
“nichebusters” to market cost effectively
What does the network model
look like in the Indian context?
What are the benefits
for Indian Pharma?
• Network of best practice partners with one
company as coordinator
• Focus on core capabilities, e.g., lead generation
to pre-clinical compounds; partnerships pursued
for targets and clinical studies
Pharma/Biotech
Licensing/ Patent
Experts
Govt. Agencies
AcademiaScientific Experts
Clinical/ Preclinical Suppliers
Lower funding needs
Source: Expert interviews, BCG analysis
Adoption of risk sharing models with partners can
help reduce funding required to pursue a single
molecule, thereby enhancing success rates
Higher efficiency
Sourcing from players with greater volumes allows
Indian company to benefit from scale and best
practices of external partner
Better quality outcomes
Sourcing from best-in-class players drives better
quality outcomes; highly unlikely that a single
company can be the best across activities
IndianPharma
4a
42Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Parallels exist globally in Pharma; smaller companies are
adopting network model to manage constraints
Biotech companies
Example: Vertex
pharmaceuticals
• Network of partners
developed to tap the best
talent
• Platforms established to
enable partners to
communicate directly with
each other to map inter-
dependencies
• Incentives usually include
license fee, royalties, or
milestone payments,
based on the partner
Venture capitalists
Example: TVM capital for
portfolio companies
• Virtual asset development:
No investment in internal
infrastructure
• Single asset focus: Fixed
investment committed to
developing single asset to
Proof of Concept stage
• Early partnering: Asset
development through
partners
• Option deals: Risk shared
with partners
Small Pharma
companies
Example: Dr. Reddy‟s
Laboratories
• In-house R&D unit spun
out and merged with 100%
owned subsidiary,
Aurigene
• Focus on in-licensing and
out-licensing
• Work given to partners
with strongest capabilities
with no preference given to
Aurigene
• Payments to partners
based on milestone and
share of royalties
Source: TVM website, expert interviews, BCG analysis
4a
43Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Government is actively establishing an innovation ecosystemHistorical barriers are being addressed
Historical barriers to India-based
life science innovation
Key actions of government to
establish ecosystem
Intellectual property regulation and government
policies:
• Introduction of product patents in 2005
• Drafting of Indian Bayh-Dole act; awaiting approval in
parliament
• Policies permitting faculty to hold executive positions
in start ups
Infrastructure:
• Creation of bio-parks and educational institutions
Funding:
• Increase in government funding for research
• Industry funding programs
• Government-backed venture capital funds
Talent:
• Increase in compensation for academics
• Repatriation programs for overseas researchers
15
12
No big success story
9
Long gestation 18
Difficult to manage partners 24
Funding shortage
Lack of talent
Respondents (%)
706050403020100
Others
30
Lack of Infrastructure 52
Company culture not
fostering innovation52
Intellectual property regulation
not supportive61
27
Govt policies not supportive
Source: BCG US and Europe Pharma companies Survey, Mar 2011 (N = 33), Press search, BCG analysis
4b
44Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
India can be leveraged for emerging technologies where
India has an advantage
Focus on new technologies that are
extensions of areas in which India has
demonstrated strengths
Select emerging technologies where Indian
regulatory environment is more
accommodating than Western markets
Source: Press search, BCG analysis
The National Institutes of Health announced that it
has suspended funding new human embryonic stem
cell research and that all federally funded
experiments already underway will be cut off when
they come up for renewal if a new court order is not
overturned. The announcement—which confirmed
fears among proponents that the ruling would result
in a comprehensive freeze in federal support for
stem cell research—came in response to a court
order Monday barring the government from funding
the research because it involves the destruction
of embryos.
– Press search Aug. 2010
Guidelines for Stem Cell Research and Therapy
have been prepared for adult, cord blood and
embryonic stem cells in response to the support
provided by the Government to facilitate stem cell
research in India so as to improve understanding of
human health and disease, & evolve strategies to
treat serious diseases
– Press search Aug. 2010
Bio-
informatics
Nano bio-
technology
Information
Technology
Life Sciences
Engineering
4b
45Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Bioinformatics: India is leveraging IT skills
to develop centers of excellence
Source: Bioinformatics Policy of India 2004, Value notes, Department of Biotechnology, Literature review, BCG analysis
Bioinformatics networkIndia was one of the first countries in the world to establish a nationwide bioinformatics network
Biotechnology Information System Network (BTIS) connects 57 key research centers, covering the entire country
DatabasesMore than 100 databases for biotechnology have been developed
Efforts are being made to ensure availability of secondary and tertiary databases and knowledge resources
Six international databases pertaining to genomics and proteomics have been mirrored under National Jai Vigyan Mission
Talent pool20+ M.Tech. and 10+ M.Sc. bioinformatics courses to be introduced in various prominent institutions
300+ colleges offering courses in biotechnology, bioinformatics, and biological sciences
Vendor landscapeOver 200 companies with some bioinformatics play
Pure bioinformatics companies like Strand Life Sciences, Molecular Connections, VLife Sciences, Cytogenomics, LabVantage
IT companies like Infosys, HCL Technologies, TCS, Mphasis, IBM
Domestic companies with focus on CRAMS like Jubilant Biosys, Avesthagen, GVK Biosciences
4b
46Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Nano biotechnology: Indian government is investing
in developing a research ecosystem
Basic research
• ~130 projects supported by individual
scientists mainly working on
fundamental scientific aspects of
nanoscale systems
• Significant results have been reported
from these projects
Application development
• 8 centers set up for nano applications
• Special grant allocated for nanotech
startups
• Nanotech incubators created to promote
entrepreneurship (e.g., NT-NCL, Pune)
• 6 projects funded under joint institution-
industry linked projects & other
programs
Human resources
• Institutes of Nano Science and
Technology to be established
• 3 international conferences conducted
• 3 advanced schools organized
• Postdoctoral fellowships initiated
Infrastructure development
• ~$250M funding earmarked for R&D
labs and academia
– 30+ universities/colleges and 15+
research institutes are engaged in
nano science research
• 11 centers of excellence for nano
science sanctioned, which will have
sophisticated infrastructure
International collaborations
• Multiple projects funded under the DST-
NSF program
• Indo-US workshops conducted
• Ongoing programs with institutions in
Germany, Italy, EU, Taiwan, Russia,
Ukraine, Japan
Platforms for interaction
• Bangalore Nano, annual event
conducted to bring together nano
experts, companies .and institutions
from India and around the world
• Vision Group consisting of researchers
from academia, industry, and research
spheres formed to develop a national
nanotechnology policy
Source: Nanomission website
4b
47Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Stem cell research: Flexible policy in India is supported
by coordinated government research efforts
India offers a flexible
policy environment…
…with players present
across the value chain…
…and has seen success
stories emerge
Countries with a permissive or
flexible policy on embryonic
stem cell research in brown
Denotes genome sequencing
center
Source: World Stem Cell Map created by University of Minnesota and last updated May 13, 2011. ―Stem Cell Research: Advantage India,‖ Forbes, Feb. 2010, press search.
Stem
cell
storage
R&D
Clinical
trials
Stem
cell
therapy
Lifecell, Stemade, Bioeden
National Centre for Biological
Science, National Centre for
Cell Science, Centre for
Cellular and Molecular Biology,
Christian Medical College
All India Institute of Medical
Sciences, LV Prasad Eye
Institute, Christian Medical
College, Medanta, Patki
Hospital, Reliance Life
Sciences
All India Institute of Medical
Sciences, LV Prasad Eye
Institute, Christian Medical
College, Gangaram Hospital,
Reliance Life Sciences
~22 public and ~7 private institutions
are authorized to conduct stem cell
research
4b
“The Centre for Stem Cell
Research at Christian Medical
College has succeeded in
reprogramming cells drawn from
adult mice and making them
function like stem cells found in
the human embryo”
– Times of India, Mar 2009
“In what can be stated to be a
huge feat for Indian stem cell
treatment, Netaji Subhash Chandra
Bose Cancer Research Institute
carried out a remarkable transplant
from an unrelated donor”
– Zeenews, Jul 2009
48Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Until recently, many hurdles existed for academia
to assume a critical role in life science innovation
Top hurdles to collaborating with academia in India
Respondents (%)
25 10075500
61
33
Reluctance to work with
government institutes39
Misdirected efforts
Risk of IP if academicians
work with competition48
Unclear regulatory stance on
technology transfer
Lack of capability 21
Lack of incentives 30
Source: BCG US and Europe Pharma companies Survey, Mar 2011 (N=33), Expert interviews
4b
“We tried collaborating with Indian academia;
however we ran into roadblocks over payment
terms.”– SVP R&D, Global Pharma
“It is difficult to establish contact with academia
in India as they are not very open to business
opportunities unlike in the US. This is probably
due to high dependence on government funds.
Indian scientists have now started
exploring/responding to such opportunities.”– SVP R&D, Global Pharma
“We have academic collaborations, but not with
Indian institutes. It is quite difficult to collaborate
with them and moreover the kind of technology
we are interested in does not exist with Indian
academia.”– CEO, Indian drug discovery company
49Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Increased focus on commercial impact: Bayh-Dole and tech
transfer introduced to improve migration from lab to market
“Indian Bayh-Dole Act” being created
to incentivize academia
Need:
• Clear policy on sharing IP from public funded
research
• Incentive for researchers in govt. institutes for
working on commercially attractive projects
Objectives:
• To create uniform legal framework for protection
and utilization of the IP generated out of public
funding
• To provide incentives for creating and
commercializing IP from public funded research
Features:
Institutes to constitute an IP management
committee that will apply for patents and manage
the commercialization process
Clear division of royalties with incentive for
researcher:
• Researchers will receive a minimum of 30% of
royalties from the public funded intellectual property
• 30% paid into the fund created by committee for IP
management
• Remainder retained by the institute for further
research
Status: Currently tabled in upper house of parliament
Enablers being instituted to promote tech.
transfer from academia to industry
Proposed to create ten national/regional technology
transfer cells (TTCs), with each servicing a cluster
of institutions in a region
TTCs to provide technology transfer services
including:
• Evaluating technology and identifying potential
commercial uses
• Developing and executing intellectual property
protection strategies
• Negotiating and monitoring the licensing
arrangements
Status:
Part of current five year plan program – on ground,
action awaited
Institutes
Regional
cluster
Technology
Transfer Cell
Source: PRS Legislative research, Planning commission of India, Literature research
4b
50Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Incentives for academia: Compensation increased by more
than 3x
1,489
1,031
407
267
0
400
800
1200
1600
Existing Revised
US$ per month US$ per month
1,489
1,031
0
400
800
1200
1600
Existing Revised
US$ per month
1,756
1,053
498
364
0
500
1000
1500
2000
Existing Revised
US$ per month
Scie
nti
st
Facu
lty
Senior Scientist Director
Associate Professor Professor
Note: Revised pay includes pay gradeSource: Indian Council of Agricultural Research; 6th pay commission
556
1,667
556
1,667
0
500
1000
1500
2000
Existing Revised
Average pay for professions with graduate
degree
1,047
480
300
178
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
Existing Revised
US$ per month
407
1,047
178
480
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
Existing Revised
US$ per month
Scientist
Assistant Professor
4b
51Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Talent: Repatriation and immersion programs introduced to
develop research talent pool
Note: The numbers mentioned above are actual awarded fellowships and not proposedSource: Press information bureau, Govt. of India, Wellcome-DBT website, BCG analysis
Young
biotechnologist
award
(61 awards;
~$9M)
Associate-
ship for Young
Scientist in
niche areas
(110+ awards;
~$7+M)
DBT-Wellcome
Trust
Fellowship
(46 awards)
Ramalingaswa
mi Fellowship
(40 awards;
~$32M)
Junior
Research
Fellowship
(290+ awards;
~$19+M)
Tata Innovation
Fellowship
(25 awards;
~$1.3M)
Programs to
promote
biotechnolo
gy research
Illustrative
4b
Scale of programs still small
with only ~150 scientists benefitting annually
Target group: Young scientists
below 35 years age
Program type: Financial
support for a project along with
a fellowship
Duration: 3 to 5 years
Target group: Scientists of
Indian origin working overseas
Program type: Fellowship for
taking up research positions in
India
Duration: 5 to 10 years
Target group: Indian
researchers involved in
interdisciplinary innovation work
Program type: Fellowship and
research grant
Duration: 3 to 5 years
Target group: Post graduates
in biotechnology
Program type: Research
fellowship
Duration: 3 to 5 years
Target group: Experienced
scientists abroad interested in
doing research work in India
Program type: Funding for
research and fellows
Duration: 5 years
Target group: Young Indian
scientists
Program type: Overseas
training in niche research areas
in biotechnology
Duration: Up to 1 year
52Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Existing infrastructure is not optimally planned; need for greater
regional concentration to develop innovation clusters
Infrastructure: Educational institutions
and bio-parks expanded
Chandigarh
Chennai
Pune
Baroda
Lucknow
Hyderabad
Bengaluru
Delhi
Kolkata
Both bio-parks and leading academia
Only bio-parks, no leading academia
Cluster of leading academia, no bio parks
Not exhaustive
Source: Literature review, BCG analysis
• Building a critical mass of companies
and leading academic institutions in a
region is key to transforming
infrastructure into an innovation cluster
• Bio-parks should be planned around top
universities and with strong linkages to
the academic organization; currently bio-
park infrastructure is too dispersed and
without strong academic linkages
• Concentration of quality academic
institutions in a region should encourage
companies to establish R&D centers
nearby to facilitate easy access to
academic talent pool
4b
53Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Government life sciences funding quadrupled over last
decade, albeit from a small base
16
12
8
4
0
~ 5.6x
11th Plan
2007-2012
10th Plan
2002-2007
9th Plan
1997-2002
Funding ($B)
24
20
Funding for Science and Technology
in different plan periods1
Expenditure by government
agencies on life sciences2
Expenditure ($M)
1,000
750
500
250
0
~3.7x
2009-102005-062000-01
1. Funding refers to actual expenditures by departments during 9th and 10th Plan. For 11th Plan funding estimated based on percentage utilization of planned outlay in period 2007-2010. 2. Estimations for major life sciences funding agencies (excluding agriculture related agencies), i.e., Department of Biotechnology, Indian Council of Medical Research, Council of Scientific and Industrial Research, and Department of Science and TechnologySource: Planning commission of India, Department of Science and Technology, BCG analysis
4b
54Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
First results: Sharp increase observed in academic output
in terms of publications
No. of publications in
Pharmacology, Toxicology, and
Pharmaceuticals
No. of publications in
Biochemistry, Genetics, and
Molecular Biology
No. of publications in
Immunology and Microbiology
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
2010200520001995
South
Korea
Taiwan
China
India
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
2010200520001995
South
Korea
Taiwan
China
India
1,000
0
2010200520001995
South
Korea
Taiwan
China
India
4,000
3,000
2,000
Source: SCImago. (2007). SJR — SCImago Journal & Country Rank, Retrieved March 15, 2011, from http://www.scimagojr.com
4b
55Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
However, innovation role of academia
will take time to play out
Low revenues from
commercialization for academia… …due to limited IP generation
Share of academia expected to be higher in India
and China due to low levels of industry R&D
activities
and significant government support to academia
Royalty and license fee ($M)
0.3
1.2
0.9
0.6
0.0
2007-08
0.9
2006-07
0.9
2005-06
0.8
2004-05
0.7
2003-04
0.8
Share (%)
8
6
4
2
16
14
12
10
0
India
<2
US
~5
China
~15
1. NRDC (National Research Development Corporation) is the organization involved in technology transfer in IndiaSource: Controller General of Patents Designs and Trademarks, Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Department of Commerce, Government of India - Strategy for Increasing Exports of Pharmaceutical Products, December 12, 2008, King, C., Science Watch, May/June 2007, India S&T 2008, National Institute of Science, Technology And Development Studies (NISTADS), CSIR, Evalueserve, press search, BCG analysis
Share of academia in patents grantedEarnings from technology
commercialization for NRDC1
Share of academia and research
organizations in drug patents
higher at ~6% for 2009-10
4b
56Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Industry, academia, and government need to contribute
actively to accelerate the development of Indian academia
Industry
• Play the role of catalyst
for commercialization by
providing funding and
bringing parties together
Government
• Ensure the critical
building blocks are in
place, i.e., talent, funding,
infrastructure, and
supportive policies
Global academia
• Facilitate accelerated
capability and capacity
building through
collaborations
Indian academia
• Promote a culture of
commercialization by
promoting collaboration
and entrepreneurship
Indian
academia as
source of
innovation
4b
While efforts required to nurture academia are substantial, the
opportunity to access a huge talent pool is much greater
Chapter 5
Stakeholder agenda and the “Inno-vision” for India
58Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Proposed recommendations for Global BioPharma
• Sourcing largely confined to low end activities
• Significant potential exists in increasing depth and breadth of activities
sourced from India
Expand scale and
scope of
sourcing
Support
academic
development
Invest in partner
development
• Share in-house expertise and best practices with partner to improve
productivity of low cost resources
• Combine advantages of Indian companies and Global BioPharma to
develop new technologies for productivity enhancement
Pursue
“nichebusters”
• Provide targets to Indian Pharma companies and transfer preclinical
compounds for clinical development
• Support commercialization efforts in Indian academia by providing
funding and networking support
Develop an
India strategy
• Top management involvement critical in establishing expectations
from India/Indian partner, and providing endorsement to the strategy
59Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Role of India in R&D strategy will vary by company
depending on starting position and priorities of companiesV
alu
e g
en
era
ted
Va
lue
in
ve
ste
d
• Vendor-buyer relationship
with limited interaction
• Cost arbitrage the primary
driver of relationship
• Low responsibility for service
provider
Sourcing for cost
• Alignment of incentives
across relationship and
internally
• Re-engineering of operating
model to boost productivity
• More collaboration in
planning
Collaborating for innovation
• Partner brings unique
capabilities to Global
Pharma R&D network
• Responsible for particular
therapeutic area/technology/
process globally
Accessing basic research talent
Time
Companies successfully pursuing India-based/sourced innovation
will follow a natural evolution path with growth in confidence in partner capabilities
Imp
ac
t o
n R
&D
pro
du
cti
vit
y
60Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Proposed recommendations for other stakeholders
• Implement favorable policies that enhance innovation and drive
collaborations
• Address the issues in critical building blocks, i.e., talent,
infrastructure, funding, strengthening IP
Indian
government
Indian service
providers
Global academia
• Collaborate with Indian academia to support agenda of capability and
capacity development
• Incentive is access to niche technologies (nanotechnologies) and
emerging areas (stem cell research)
Indian Pharma
Indian academia
• Develop a differentiated value proposition to emerge as attractive
innovation partners for Global BioPharma
• Transform business model from an integrated to a network approach
to develop ―nichebusters‖ for Global BioPharma
• Support commercialization efforts in Indian academia
• Drive commercialization in institutes by encouraging collaborations
and entrepreneurship
61Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
A concerted effort by all stakeholders can create a vibrant
innovation environment
The “Inno-vision” for India
Market
Pipeline
People
2010
~$2B1 R&D spend in India
2025
~$25B R&D spend in India
No commercialized drug with
significant IP contribution in
India
10-20 commercialized drugs with
significant IP contribution from
India
~3000 PhDsRequirement in excess of
~20,000 PhDs
1. This number is higher than the $0.9M mentioned earlier for size of R&D sourcing market as it includes spend on proprietary programs, as well as government fundingSource: BCG analysis
Appendix
Meet the authors
63Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Meet the authors (1/2)
Bart Janssens, lead author, is a Partner and Managing Director in BCG‘s Mumbai office and heads BCG‘s India health care
team. He has extensive experience across BioPharma, medical devices, providers, and payers in India. He has advised a
variety of health care companies around the world and in India, helping them chart out their strategy, improve their
performance, and strengthen their service delivery. Over the past few years, most of his work with clients in India has been
focused on driving exponential growth, improving innovation, and increasing access to innovative products and healthcare in
India. Contact info: Janssens.Bart@bcg.com, +91 22 6749 7153
Simon Goodall is a Partner and Managing Director in the Los Angeles office of The Boston Consulting Group. He heads
BCG‘s US West Coast health care team and is a member of the global health care practice leadership team. Simon‘s focus
areas are biotech, specialty Pharma, and MedTech industries, with an emphasis on helping companies improve new product
development and commercialization. Contact info: Goodall.Simon@bcg.com, +1 213 633 4511
Sarwar Islam is a Partner and Managing Director in BCG‘s New York office. He is a core member of BCG‘s health care and
Operations Practice Areas. He has focused on consulting clients in the BioPharma/generics industry in the US, Europe, and
Asia/Pacific on a broad range of strategy and operations issues.
Contact info: Islam.Sarwar@bcg.com, +1 212 446 2897
Kim Wagner is a Senior Partner and Managing Director in the New York office of The Boston Consulting Group. She is a
senior member within its Health Care, Operations, and Global Advantage (RDEs) practices and leads the product development
topic for the firm. Kim works with clients to address opportunities in productivity, sourcing, cross-functional coordination,
process/ organizational design, new product development, portfolio optimization, innovation, strategy, and globalization/off-
shoring. Contact info: Wagner.Kim@bcg.com, +1 973 218 8330
64Life sciences R&D: Changing the innovation equation in India
Copyr
ight
© 2
011 b
y T
he B
osto
n C
onsultin
g G
roup
Meet the authors (2/2)
Rahul Guha is a Principal in the Mumbai office of The Boston Consulting Group. He is an active member of the firm‘s health care
practice. He has worked on projects in the BioPharmaceuticals/generics industry for clients in India and US on a broad range of
strategy and operations topics. Rahul has an MBA from IIM Bangalore.
Contact info: Guha.Rahul@bcg.com, +91 22 6749 7133
Gaurav Lal is a Senior Associate in the Mumbai office of The Boston Consulting Group. Since joining the firm, he has worked
across different industries on strategy and operations topics. Gaurav has an MBA from IIM Calcutta.
Contact info: Lal.Gaurav@bcg.com, +91 22 6749 7189
Kinjal Morakhia is a Senior Associate in BCG‘s Mumbai office and has worked significantly in the health care practice. She has
worked on growth strategy projects for a leading BioPharma company. Her primary area of focus has been emerging markets.
Kinjal has an MBA from IIM Bangalore.
Contact info: Morakhia.Kinjal@bcg.com, +91 22 6749 7138
Saurabh Tayal is a Project Leader based in the New Delhi office of The Boston Consulting Group. Saurabh has consulting
experience across the areas of operational excellence, growth strategy, cost reduction, and benchmarking. Prior to joining the
firm, he has worked in the pharmaceutical industry at Dr. Reddy‘s Laboratories in the areas of corporate planning and supply
chain. He completed his B.Tech. from IIT Roorkee and has an MBA from IIM Calcutta
Contact info: Tayal.Saurabh@bcg.com, +91 124 459 7246
Karun RishiPresident
Email: info@usaindiachamber.org
Tel: + 1 781 586-1212
www.usaindiachamber.org