Ransohoff-2015-The potential impact of biosimilars on ... · PDF fileservices and perform...
Transcript of Ransohoff-2015-The potential impact of biosimilars on ... · PDF fileservices and perform...
BioProcess Technology Consultantswww.bptc.com
Tom RansohoffPrincipal ConsultantBioProcess Technology Consultants, Inc.IBC Biopharmaceutical Development and Production ConferenceHuntington Beach, CA, USAMar 30 – Apr 2, 2015
The Potential Impact of Biosimilarson Biomanufacturing Capacity
Outline Current global biopharmaceutical capacity landscape
• Geographical distribution• Balance of supply and demand
Biosimilar trends and pipeline• Data from marketed products• Pipeline and forecasts
Future growth and market penetration of biosimilars • Survey Results• Comparison to generics• Approaches to forecasting
2 From Clone to Commercial®
From Clone to Commercial®3
Current Biomanufacturing Capacity Landscape
Antibody products continue to drive growingdemand for capacity Antibody product aggregate
demand reached ~10 tons in 2013
Sales CAGR for antibody products 13.8% compared to 5.2% for other biopharma products (2009‐2013)
Analysis based on BPTC’s bioTRAK® database related to supply and demand for biomanufacturingcapacity. Uses include:
• Forecasting future supply and demand for manufacturing capacity
• Assessing the demand and market potential for technologies and services and perform competitive analyses
• Strategic facility life cycle management
• Identifying secondary suppliers
From Clone to Commercial®4
Top Ten Biopharmaceutical Products Total 2013 sales of almost $70 billion
Six are produced in cell culture
Seven are monoclonal antibody‐related products
CAGR for monoclonal antibody‐related products 2003‐2013 was ~24%
USProduct Name Company 2013 Sales
(Billions USD)
Humira Abbvie 10.659
Remicade J&J/Merck & Co. 8.994
Enbrel Amgen/Pfizer 8.325
Lantus Sanofi 7.590
Rituxan Roche 7.500
Avastin Roche 6.748
Herceptin Roche 6.559
Novolog Novo Nordisk 4.739
Neulasta Amgen 4.392
Lucentis Roche/Novartis 4.205
From Clone to Commercial®5
Product Companies Control >70% of Cell Culture Capacity
From Clone to Commercial®6
Geographic Distribution of Cell Culture Capacity
From Clone to Commercial®7
Balance of mammalian supply and demand trending towards higher utilization rates
From Clone to Commercial®Perfusion capacity adjusted to equivalent fed‐batch capacity where appropriate
8
From Clone to Commercial®9
Biosimilars Trends and Pipeline
Market dynamics favor biosimilars growthGlobal Trends in the Pharma and Health Care Fields:
① Global pharmaceutical sales forecast to reach >$1T by 2017― Currently, biologics drug expenditure already accounts for ~20% of
pharmaceutical spend and are >33% of all drugs in development MAbs are largest and fastest growing segment
② Continuous financial pressure on healthcare systems to make significant and sustained cost reductions
― US healthcare spending by 2021 forecast to be ~20% GDP
10
③Major biopharmaceutical products are losing patent protection coupled with new regulatory approval pathways for biosimilars in major markets
From Clone to Commercial®
Biosimilars market is becoming highly competitive
From Clone to Commercial®
All major markets now have biosimilar legislation in place
Overall demand still small relative to innovator products but growing rapidly
Large pharma companies are increasingly entering this segment
Transition underway from early recombinant proteins to Mabs
Competition in the biosimilarMabs field is significant
Significant growth of programs targeting developed markets
bioTRAK® Database, BPTC, Mar 2015.
bioTRAK® Database, BPTC, Mar 2015.
11
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Num
ber o
f Ann
ounced
Program
s
Biosimilars Products in Development Worldwide
Marketed
Phase 3
Phase 1
Preclinical
0 50 100 150 200 250
Asia
Western EU/US
Latin America
Other
Number of Programs ‐ All Development Stages
Geo
grap
hical R
egion
Geographical Distribution of Target Markets for Biosimilars Programs
Recent developments highlight increasing activity
12 From Clone to Commercial®
‐NY Times, Mar 6, 2015
‐Financial Times, Feb 25, 2015
‐Fierce Biotech, Feb 4, 2015
‐Reuters, Jan 21, 2015
Novartis/ Sandoz
Celltrion; Pfizer
Amgen
Samsung; Biogen Idec
Biosimilars experiencing high sales growth
13 From Clone to Commercial®
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022
Follo
w‐on Biologics S
ales ($
B)
Year
Worldwide Sales Growth of Follow‐on Biologics($B)
IMS Data, adapted from 2013 IMS Health Report, “Searching for Terra Firma.”
Sales of follow‐on biologics (biosimilars, biobetters and other non‐original biologics) growing at ~30+% per year
Worldwide sales forecast to reach ~$20B (8% of total biologics sales) by 2020.
From Clone to Commercial®14
Forecasting the Future
BioPulse Survey:Predictions about Biosimilar Impact on Capacity
15
Biosimilars will probably cause a
shortage of manufacturing
capacity37%
Biosimilars will not cause any shortage of
manufacturing capacity37%
The increase will definitely cause a
shortage of capacity10%
The increase will cause a shortage of capacity, but only in certain manufacturing
markets16%
From Clone to Commercial®
Facilities of the Future? – Manufacturing and Technology Trends
From Clone to Commercial®
Flexible
Modular
Disposable
Continuous
From Aspen Brook Alert Survey,Oct 10, 2014
Courtesy: Tarpon Biosystems
Courtesy: Pall Corp
Courtesy: KSep
16
Forecasting demand: can we learn from generics? Biosimilars are different from generic pharmaceuticals in many ways,
but there are also similarities to consider
30 year Anniversary of Hatch‐Waxman (1984)• Enabled competition with branded pharmaceutical products
through a codified pathway supported by regulatory guidance • Provided mechanisms and boundaries for the use of innovator IP
after patent expiry • Allowed for an abbreviated clinical pathway and potential for
substitutability • Addressed a market desire for lower cost pharmaceuticals
17 From Clone to Commercial®
Forecasting demand: can we learn from generics? (2) Impact of Hatch‐Waxman1
• % of pharmaceutical prescriptions filled by generics increased from ― 19% in 1984 to ― 43% in 1996 to ― 86% in 2013
• Generics have become increasingly competitive over time:― Price decreases have increased over time
Generics are now often sold at 10% of innovator prices
GPhA estimates generics have saved $1.5T over past 10 years
― The average innovator market share one year after generic entry has decreased from 45% in 2000 to 16% in 2012
― The average period of sales for innovator products prior to generic competition has decreased to 12.9 years in 2012
• GDUFA implemented in 2012
Why won’t this happen with biosimilars over time?
18 From Clone to Commercial®
1 – Thayer, A. 30 Years of Generics, C&E News. 2014 Sep 29; 92(39): 8‐16.
There are some reasons to expect the magnitude of change for biosimilars will be less than for generics and will take longer:• Biosimilars require highly sophisticated process and analytical development
capabilities • Investment in clinical and non‐clinical work required for approval is likely to be
substantially greater• More marketing infrastructure will be required• Substitutability may be much more difficult to achieve• Successful biosimilar companies will likely require larger R&D and Sales &
Marketing budgets than their generic counterparts
What will the biosimilars market look like in 5 years? 15 years? 30 years?• Directionally, biosimilars are likely to be follow generics, with increasing market
share, price decreases and innovator market erosion over time• The magnitude and time frame of these changes are highly uncertain – how
can we estimate demand?
19 From Clone to Commercial®1 – Thayer, A. 30 Years of Generics, C&E News. 2014 Sep 29; 92(39): 8‐16.
Forecasting demand: can we learn from generics? (3)
What level of price erosion will occur with biosimilars?
In a recent white paper, Brill* performed an NPV‐type analysis and concluded that biosimilars are most viable for biologics with annual (pre‐biosimilar) sales of approximately $900M• A key assumption is that the biosimilar would be priced at a 20% discount to
the innovator product in Y1, rising to a 40% discount in Y4 and thereafter
Using Brill’s assumptions (e.g., for development and launch costs, market penetration rates, discount rates), we asked a related but different question:• What is the discount that could be applied to a biosimilar as a function of
innovator annual sales volume?
Two margin cases were considered:• Case 1: The margin assumptions in Brill’s case were conserved as the discount
rose• Case 2: The margins declined from the assumptions in Brill’s case as the
discount rose
20 From Clone to Commercial®
Brill A, “The Economic Viability of a U.S. Biosimilars Industry,” Matrix Global Advisors Report (Feb 2015).
What level of price erosion will occur with biosimilars?Modeling results
21 From Clone to Commercial®
NPV analysis conducted by BPTC using assumptions from Brill report (Feb 2015).
$‐
$1.00
$2.00
$3.00
$4.00
$5.00
$6.00
$7.00
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
Breakeven Pe
ak Reven
ue of Inn
ovator ($
B)
Y4 Discount vs. Innovator Price
Breakeven Revenue Breakeven Rev (w Margin Adjust)
Conclusion: The price erosion for biosimilars of high revenue innovator productsmay be significant in competitive markets.
Economically Viable
Economically Non‐Viable
Biosimilars Pricing in Developing Countries Motivation and Goals
• Biosimilars are most important in emerging economies due to affordability• Serve patients that cannot be served by innovators
Pricing• Significant reductions in pricing observed where biosimilars launched in India
― tPA ($2,000 USD ‐> $500 after introduction of biosimilar)
― EPO (8 manufacturers – highly competitive – “syringe now most expensive element of product”)
― Rituximab (Significant price drop; 6 years on market; market expansion)
― Insulin glargine – dropped to 40% of original pricing
• Some countries have “winner take all” tenders, leading to competitive bidding processes (e.g., recent Norway infliximab tender)
• Affordable biologics are inevitable, whether biosimilars or follow‐on biologics
Cost• Biosimilar manufacturers have an opportunity and incentive to be innovative in
reducing manufacturing and development costs• Cost and price needs to enable manufacturer to be sustainably profitable
22 From Clone to Commercial®
Forecasting demand from biosimilars –Consider potential scenarios
23 From Clone to Commercial®
Very early stage and high degree of uncertainty look at different scenarios
Scenario 1: Biosimilars are a “zero sum game”• Price decreases from new biosimilar entrants will be modest• Impact on demand will be limited (i.e., gains in demand for biosimilars will be
directly offset by losses in demand for innovator products)• Result: No change in overall demand profile due to competition from
biosimilars
Scenario 2: Biosimilars lead to significant price competition• Biosimilars will result in significant price decreases over time• Gains in demand for biosimilars will significantly outpace loss in demand for
innovator products on a global basis• Result: Increase in overall demand profile for products with significant
biosimilar competition• In this case, how to estimate the potential magnitude of increase in demand?
Forecasting demand from high demand scenario –Preliminary thoughts on approach
24 From Clone to Commercial®
Assume US demand is inelastic (i.e., price drop will not influence demand) and represents “state of the art” standard of care [Scenario 1]
Assume demand in ROW is more elastic and treatment percentages will increase as prices decline [Scenario 2]
Definitions:• Estimated Treatment Rate = Estimated Number of Patients Treated with Product / Estimated Prevalence
• Estimated Number of Patients Treated = Sales in Geography ($/yr) / Treatment Cost ($/patient/yr)
Two cases evaluated using estimates from bioTRAK database: Herceptin (Breast Cancer) and Enbrel (RA)
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
Herceptin
Enbrel
Estd Treatment Rate, WW ex‐US Estd Treatment Rate, US
Forecasting demand from high demand scenario (2) –Potential magnitude of impact
25 From Clone to Commercial®
Table below correlates predicted increase in demand for drug as a function of the percentage of the “treatment gap” that is filled in ex‐US markets by “elastic demand”
10% 25% 40%
trastuzumab 13% 31% 50%etanercept 26% 66% 105%Average 19% 48% 78%
% Treatment Gap Filled
Predicted Increase in drug demand
In this scenario, the magnitude of demand increase for just the top 10 volume products is a significant percentage of total global capacity
Conclusions: Some Likely Impacts of Biosimilars on Biomanufacturing Capacity Landscape
From Clone to Commercial®
Biosimilars will eventually drive an increase in overall demand for biomanufacturing capacity
• Magnitude and timing difficult to forecast • Will be driven by impact of price decreases on global demand for biosimilar products
New capacity for biosimilars will be required in any event due to mismatch of ownership and geographical distribution of current capacity
• Product companies control >70% of total capacity• Demand for in‐country and/or regional supply in geographies with limited/no capacity
Some biosimilars firms are likely to adopt single‐use and/or novel technologies to • Reduce initial capital requirements and overall operating
expenses and• Enable flexible response to uncertain demand
26
Acknowledgments BioProcess Technology Consultants
• Dawn M. Ecker
• Patti Seymour
• Howard Levine
From Clone to Commercial®27
Thank You!
BioProcess Technology Consultants, Inc.12 Gill Street, Suite 5450Woburn, MA 01801
781-281-2704
Tom Ransohoff