Temporal trends in oncology drug revenue among the world’s major pharmaceutical companies: A 2010-2019 cohort study.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6505-6505
Author(s):  
Daniel E. Meyers ◽  
Benjamin S. Meyers ◽  
Timothy M. Chisamore ◽  
Kristin Wright ◽  
Bishal Gyawali ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Temporal Trends ◽  
Multiple Hypothesis Testing ◽  
Cancer Drug ◽  
Pharmaceutical Companies ◽  
Cancer Drugs ◽  
Total Revenue ◽  
Sales Data ◽  
The Past ◽  
Net Revenue

6505 Background: In the past decade there has been a 70% increase in the number of clinical trials for cancer drugs. During this time, there has also been a substantial increase in the price of cancer drugs. It is unclear how these trends have changed the revenue landscape of major pharmaceutical companies. In this study we characterize temporal trends in cancer drug revenue relative to non-cancer drugs. Methods: This retrospective cohort study used publicly available global sales data from the 10 pharmaceutical companies with the highest annual revenue in 2019; Abbvie (AB), AstraZeneca (AZ), Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS), GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), Johnson & Johnson (JJ), Merck (M), Novartis (N), Pfizer (P), Roche (R) and Sanofi (S). We quantified the contribution of cancer drugs to net revenue for each company from 2010 – 2019 using consolidated annual financial reports (i.e. 10-K or 20-F forms). Cancer drugs were defined as those with an FDA-approved indication for anti-cancer effect or supportive care. All sales data were converted to USD and adjusted for global inflation. Trends in the percentage of company revenues accounted for by cancer drugs were assessed with the Kendall-Mann test. P-values were adjusted for multiple hypothesis testing using the Benjamini-Hochberg method. Results: During 2010-2019, cumulative annual revenue generated from cancer drugs in our cohort of companies (n = 10) increased by 96%, from $52.8 billion to $103.5 billion. The cumulative revenue from non-oncology drugs decreased by 19%, from $342.5 billion to $276.9 billion. The proportion of total revenue generated from cancer drugs grew over time; from 13% in 2010 to 27% in 2019 (p < 0.001). During 2015-2019, annual revenue for the study cohort grew by 12%: from $339.7 billion to $380.4 billion. During this period non-oncology revenues remained stagnant (mean $278.9 billion, range 276.9 – 281.9), while oncology revenues grew by 66%; from $61.4 billion to $103.5 billion. Six companies (AB, AZ, BMS, JJ, N, and P) saw substantial increases in the proportion of revenue attributable to cancer drugs. R had both the highest net revenue ($23.9 billion), and highest proportion of revenue (57%) from cancer drugs in 2010 among the cohort, similar to 2019 ($27.7 billion, 57%; p = 0.37). While not reaching significance over the total study period, M saw increases in oncology revenue from $1.5 billion in 2015 to $12.3 billion in 2019 (4% to 30% of total revenue); driven almost exclusively by sales of Pembrolizumab. Conclusions: Amongst the world’s largest pharmaceutical companies, sales revenue from cancer drugs have increased by 96% over the past decade, while revenues from non-cancer drugs have decreased by 19%. Revenues from cancer drugs accounted for 27% of company revenues in 2019. Further work is needed to understand if this massive increase in sales revenues has translated into proportional improvements in patient and population outcomes.

scholarly journals Trends of Business-to-Business Transactions to Develop Innovative Cancer Drugs

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (14) ◽  
pp. 5535
Author(s):  
Arisa Djurian ◽  
Tomohiro Makino ◽  
Yeongjoo Lim ◽  
Shintaro Sengoku ◽  
Kota Kodama
Keyword(s):  
Small Molecules ◽  
Open Innovation ◽  
Business Environment ◽  
New Drugs ◽  
Cancer Drug ◽  
Annual Number ◽  
Pharmaceutical Companies ◽  
Cancer Drugs ◽  
Innovative Drug ◽  
Medical Needs

A key concept in the pharmaceutical industry is open innovation, in which pharmaceutical companies contribute to human health and adapt to a changing business environment by acquiring external knowledge. As successful drug discoveries and developments have become challenging, pharmaceutical companies must proactively pursue the open innovation of new drugs through various inter-firm partnerships to be more sustainable. This study aims to interpret the trend of inter-firm partnerships in the development of cancer drugs and to evaluate their effectiveness by examining inter-firm transactions related to cancer drugs approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). It is a novel approach to exercise this on each product instead of at the company level. The findings revealed that the number of inter-firm transactions in the oncology field has increased over the past 20 years. Furthermore, the annual number of transactions related to biologics has surpassed that of small molecules since 2015 and has been primarily driven by three PD-(L)1 inhibitors: Keytruda, Opdivo, and Tecentriq. Moreover, the average number of inter-firm transactions related to biologics is significantly higher than that of small molecules in total, in alliances, and in financing, suggesting that inter-firm transactions for biologic cancer drugs actively occur through various means. Additionally, a positive and significant correlation exists between the number of transactions and the average number of approved indications for biologics, but not for small molecules. These results suggest that the observed trend of active inter-firm transactions is key in increasing the probability of success in cancer drug research and development. This could provide a potential breakthrough in this industry for the successful development of innovative drug candidates to address unmet medical needs. Further study is necessary to confirm the applicability of this paradigm in broader drug discoveries and development.

Fanconi Anemia DNA Repair Pathway as a New Mechanism to Exploit Cancer Drug Resistance

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (9) ◽  
pp. 779-787
Author(s):  
Kajal Ghosal ◽  
Christian Agatemor ◽  
Richard I. Han ◽  
Amy T. Ku ◽  
Sabu Thomas ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Drug Resistance ◽  
Dna Repair ◽  
Fanconi Anemia ◽  
Cancer Drug ◽  
Drug Resistant ◽  
Cancer Drugs ◽  
Repair Pathway ◽  
Cancer Drug Resistance ◽  
Anti Cancer ◽  
Cancerous Cells

Chemotherapy employs anti-cancer drugs to stop the growth of cancerous cells, but one common obstacle to the success is the development of chemoresistance, which leads to failure of the previously effective anti-cancer drugs. Resistance arises from different mechanistic pathways, and in this critical review, we focus on the Fanconi Anemia (FA) pathway in chemoresistance. This pathway has yet to be intensively researched by mainstream cancer researchers. This review aims to inspire a new thrust toward the contribution of the FA pathway to drug resistance in cancer. We believe an indepth understanding of this pathway will open new frontiers to effectively treat drug-resistant cancer.

Temporal Trends in Undervaccination: A Population-Based Cohort Study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew F. Daley ◽  
Liza M. Reifler ◽  
Jo Ann Shoup ◽  
Komal J. Narwaney ◽  
Elyse O. Kharbanda ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Temporal Trends ◽  
Population Based

scholarly journals Temporal trends in severe COVID-19 outcomes in patients with rheumatic disease: a cohort study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
April Jorge ◽  
Kristin M D'Silva ◽  
Andrew Cohen ◽  
Zachary S Wallace ◽  
Natalie McCormick ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Rheumatic Disease ◽  
Temporal Trends

scholarly journals DRUG REPOSITION OF NON-CANCER DRUGS FOR CANCER TREATMENTS VIA PHARMACOVIGILANCE APPROACH - REPURPOSING DRUGS IN ONCOLOGY

2019 ◽  
pp. 310-314 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mrugank Bhaskarkumar Parmar ◽  
Shital Panchal
Keyword(s):  
Statistical Analysis ◽  
Cancer Treatment ◽  
Drug Repositioning ◽  
Adverse Event Reporting System ◽  
Adverse Event Reporting ◽  
Cancer Drug ◽  
Cancer Drugs ◽  
Management Activity ◽  
Post Marketing Surveillance ◽  
Source Data

This study for drug repositioning has been performed for the drugs which are in the market since more than a decade and they are approved with their well-established efficacy and safety in human being. Objective of this study was to reposition the existing non-cancer drug therapy for cancer treatment, which is having well characterized pharmacologic profile with more efficacy and least toxicity as anti-neoplastic agent. We have retrieved the source data from FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) for the last 13 years covering duration from 2004 to 2016 and analysed those using pharmacovigilance approach ‘a proposed future novel pharmaceutical tool for drug reposition’. Signal management activity was performed for statistical analysis. Result of statistical analysis derived that propranolol; metformin; pioglitazone; dabigatran and nitroglycerin are the existing non-cancer drugs which deserved for their direct / indirect reposition for cancer treatment and anti-neoplastic activity. Further studies retrieving the source data from other regulatory database (e.g. Eudravigilance of EMA and VigiFlow of WHO) and post-marketing surveillance study with the same objective may adjuvant our results for the reposition of existing drugs by pharmacovigilance approach.

Continental Divide? The Attitudes of US and Canadian Oncologists on the Costs, Cost-Effectiveness, and Health Policies Associated With New Cancer Drugs

2010 ◽  
Vol 28 (27) ◽  
pp. 4149-4153 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott R. Berry ◽  
Chaim M. Bell ◽  
Peter A. Ubel ◽  
William K. Evans ◽  
Eric Nadler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Health Care Systems ◽  
The United States ◽  
Drug Costs ◽  
Cancer Drug ◽  
Cancer Drugs ◽  
Care Systems ◽  
Effective Treatments

Purpose Oncologists in the United States and Canada work in different health care systems, but physicians in both countries face challenges posed by the rising costs of cancer drugs. We compared their attitudes regarding the costs and cost-effectiveness of medications and related health policy. Methods Survey responses of a random sample of 1,355 United States and 238 Canadian medical oncologists (all outside of Québec) were compared. Results Response rate was 59%. More US oncologists (67% v 52%; P < .001) favor access to effective treatments regardless of cost, while more Canadians favor access to effective treatments only if they are cost-effective (75% v 58%; P < .001). Most (84% US, 80% Canadian) oncologists state that patient out-of-pocket costs influence their treatment recommendations, but less than half the respondents always or frequently discuss the costs of treatments with their patients. The majority of oncologists favor more use of cost-effectiveness data in coverage decisions (80% US, 69% Canadian; P = .004), but fewer than half the oncologists in both countries feel well equipped to use cost-effectiveness information. Majorities of oncologists favor government price controls (57% US, 68% Canadian; P = .01), but less than half favor more cost-sharing by patients (29% US, 41% Canadian; P = .004). Oncologists in both countries prefer to have physicians and nonprofit agencies determine whether drugs provide good value. Conclusion Oncologists in the United States and Canada generally have similar attitudes regarding cancer drug costs, cost-effectiveness, and associated policies, despite practicing in different health care systems. The results support providing education to help oncologists in both countries use cost-effectiveness information and discuss drug costs with their patients.

An ambispective cohort study of inflammatory myopathies to understand the clinical profile and temporal trends in management

2021 ◽  
Vol 429 ◽  
pp. 118365
Author(s):  
P.M. Yogeesh ◽  
V.Y. Vishnu ◽  
Mv Padma Srivastava ◽  
Rohit Bhatia ◽  
Mamta Singh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Temporal Trends ◽  
Clinical Profile ◽  
Inflammatory Myopathies

scholarly journals Impact of the pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review on provincial concordance with respect to cancer drug funding decisions and time to funding

2017 ◽  
Vol 24 (5) ◽  
pp. 295 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Srikanthan ◽  
H. Mai ◽  
N. Penner ◽  
E. Amir ◽  
A. Laupacis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Linear Models ◽  
Drug Product ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Cancer Drug ◽  
Cancer Drugs ◽  
Oncology Drug ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Canadian Provinces ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Drug Review

Background The pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review (pcodr) was implemented in 2011 to address uneven drug coverage and lack of transparency with respect to the various provincial cancer drug review processes in Canada. We evaluated the impact of the pcodr on provincial decision concordance and time from Notice of Compliance (noc) to drug funding.Methods In a retrospective review, Health Canada’s Drug Product Database was used to identify new indications for cancer drugs between January 2003 and May 2014, and provincial formulary listings for drug-funding dates and decisions between 1 January 2003 and 31 December 2014 were retrieved. Multiple linear models and quantile regressions were used to evaluate changes in time to decision-making before and after the implementation of the pcodr. Agreement of decisions between provinces was evaluated using kappa statistics.Results Data were available from 9 provinces (all Canadian provinces except Quebec), identifying 88 indications that represented 51 unique cancer drugs. Two provinces lacked available data for all 88 indications at the time of data collection. Interprovincial concordance in drug funding decisions significantly increased after the pcodr’s implementation (Brennan-Prediger coefficient: 0.54 pre-pcodr vs. 0.78 post-pcodr; p = 0.002). Nationwide, the median number of days from Health Canada’s noc date to the date of funding significantly declined (to 393 days from 522 days, p < 0.001). Exploratory analyses excluding provinces with incomplete data did not change the results.Conclusions After the implementation of the pcodr, greater concordance in cancer drug funding decisions between provinces and decreased time to funding decisions were observed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document