Brand Name Drugs

Big Pharma goes to Hollywood

Tracy Staton — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 10:59:09 -0400

How is pharma like the movie biz? They both need blockbusters. Some may say that chasing after the mega-hit no longer works--that satisfying niche markets can be just as profitable--but the Harvard Business Review begs to differ. "In a globally integrated market, blockbuster brands that address common consumer needs are more important than ever," according to HBR. "Blockbusters also motivate salespeople, get them access to customers, and drive distribution for other products in a company's portfolio."

And just in case you weren't sure just what, exactly, a blockbuster product is, HBR offers a primer:

Size. A blockbuster breaks sales records and transforms its company, often by opening up new global markets.
Speed. Big drugs don't just sell a lot, they ramp up quickly. "[T]hey often enjoy vertical sales lift-off," the mag says.
Scarcity. Blockbuster brands are often so in demand that they run scarce, and counterfeiters jump in to copy them.
Sustainability. Their sales charts may be vertical at the beginning, but they level off at the top, continuing to sell at a high rate for a long time.
Sizzle. A blockbuster doesn't just meet a need, but does it in an "exciting" way, via "superior marketing and sales."

How does this square with your definitions? And do you agree with the Hollywood comparisons?

- read the article at BusinessWeek

Study: Drug ads drown in online noise

Fri, 11 Apr 2008 06:59:54 -0400

Pharma marketing just got harder: A new study shows that patients are getting more information on meds from blogs and social-networking sites--places where drugmakers can't control their brand messages.

When consumers search for online info about cholesterol meds, for instance, blogs and social media forums often show up among the top results. And the information consumers find at those sites "often occurs in a manner that's not friendly or favorable to the brands," according to the new report by v-Fluence Interactive. Blogs and forums are more likely to compare various brand-name drugs and to talk about negative side effects. Ironically, drug ads are sometimes found placed on these sites--locations where marketing doesn't do the drugs themselves any favors.

- check out the v-Fluence press release

Related Articles:
To DTC or not to DTC? Advertising report
Should FDA's info be in all DTC ads? DTC report
FDA to study TV drug ad imagery. DTC report
Survey: No doubt DTC ads work. Ad report
Study: DTC ad spending on the rise. DTC report

ALSO NOTED: High-dose Celebrex triples heart risk; Actos slows plaque buildup in arteries;

Tue, 01 Apr 2008 07:59:50 -0400

> Patients taking the largest dose of Pfizer's painkiller Celebrex, 400 mg twice a day, tripled their chance of heart attack or stroke compared with placebo, according to a new study presented at the American College of Cardiology meeting. Report

> Takeda's Actos slowed the progression of arterial plaque buildup, becoming the first type 2 diabetes med to reduce progression of coronary atherosclerosis, a new study showed. Report

> Stunned by a report that doctors are needlessly prescribing brand-name drugs, France is considering setting up a force of 1,700 anti-drug reps to counteract sales pressure with "objective" information. A bill that would set up a similar force in the U.S. is pending in Congress. Report

> ING started its analyst coverage of GlaxoSmithKline with a 'buy' rating and a prediction that new CEO Andrew Witty would bring a fresh strategic approach to the company. Report

> Doctors called Merck's online promotions the best of their kind, with GlaxoSmithKline coming in second, a Verispan survey showed. Report

> Boston Scientific is selling off its endovascular aortic repair program for $30 million to a Santa Rosa, CA-based investor group. Report

> Dr Reddy's Laboratories has agreed to buy part of Dow Chemical's pharmaceuticals business in a bid to boost its custom manufacturing services. Report

> Pliva CFO Ivan Mijatovic has been appointed senior vice president for corporate development of parent company Barr Pharmaceuticals. Report

> Medco Health Solutions is partnering with the Swedish government on a prescription review program designed to prevent medication errors. Report

> Struggling to right itself after a long dry spell in new drug approvals, Eli Lilly is preparing to a launch a late-stage study of an experimental drug for Alzheimer's. Report

> In a head-to-head study, the new antiplatelet drug prasugrel (being developed by Lilly and Daiichi Sankyo) in combination with aspirin outperformed the standard therapy, clopidogrel (Plavix) with aspirin. Report

> In a possible boon to the biotech industry, the SBA is looking to hike research grants to small U.S. businesses. Report

And Finally... Scientists are studying whether fasting can protect healthy cells against chemotherapy, making cancer treatment more effective. Report

ALSO NOTED: Does FDA scrutinize new generics enough?; BMS shops baby-food business;

Mon, 17 Mar 2008 07:59:50 -0400

> Are generics as good as brand-name drugs? The Los Angeles Times questions the FDA's generic-approval process, which leans lightly on drug makers. Report

> Bristol-Myers Squibb is looking to get out of the baby food business, scouting out potential buyers for the $7 billion to $9 billion unit. Report

> Potential buyers have been touring Pfizer's Ann Arbor, MI, facility, which is set to close in 2009. Report

> India's Sun Pharmaceutical Industries got FDA approval for its copycat form of AstraZeneca's Ethyol, used to reduce kidney damage in patients with advanced ovarian cancer. Report

> Teva is planning an aggressive move into biogenerics. Report

> In an interview, Celgene CEO Sol Barer laid out some of the basics in how it will integrate operations with Pharmion, a biotech Celgene paid $2.9 billion for. Report

And Finally... A new book takes Big Pharma to task for marketing tactics. Report

Pharma growth drops to 1961 levels

Wed, 12 Mar 2008 07:59:58 -0400

IMS Health is out with its new annual pharma sales report, and it ain't pretty. Revenue grew by only 3.8 percent to $286.5 billion, the slowest pace of expansion since 1961. By contrast, sales expanded by 6 percent in 2006. Total prescription volume rose only by 2.8 percent, compares with 4.6 percent the previous year.

A few bright spots buried within those overall numbers, though. Cancer meds grew by 14 percent. Biotech product sales expanded by 9 percent, and specialist-driven therapies by 10 percent. The offsetting dark spots? Try a 15.4 percent drop in year-over-year cholesterol-med sales.

IMS cited a few reasons for the slowing growth, including--of course--increasing competition from generics; $17 billion worth of branded drugs lost exclusivity in 2007. Plus, new meds only represented $441 million worth of sales last year because of fewer product launches and slower adoption of the new products. And then there were the safety issues: Black Box warnings, withdrawals, and the like. IMS estimates that safety concerns cut into sales of products that account for 10 percent of the market.

- check out the press release from IMS
- read the CNN Money story
- check out the analysis and charts at Pharmalot

Related Articles:
The specter of generic competition grows. Report
Wanted: Rugged pharmas for tough trip. Report
Say goodbye to Big Pharma's gilded age. Report
PwC to pharma: Adapt and invest or die. Report
New drug approval lags in 2007. Report

Study: Costlier drug worked better

Wed, 05 Mar 2008 06:59:56 -0500

Here's some rock-and-a-hard-place news about drug costs. Drug makers raised prices by an average of 7.4 percent on the brand-name meds most often prescribed to the elderly. The increase outpaced inflation by a huge margin. Meanwhile, the government's price index has shown less growth, largely because of generic switching. So branded drugs cost significantly more, but because people are taking more generics, overall drug spending hasn't grown as fast.

But here's the kicker. A new study shows that when people think a drug is more expensive, it appears to work better. Researchers tested two dummy pain pills against each other; one was given a price tag of $2.50 per pill and the other had been "discounted" to 10 cents. More patients taking the $2.50 pill reported pain relief than those taking the cheaper one--85 percent to 61 percent, respectively.

This phenomenon might explain the popularity of brand-name meds over cheaper alternatives--and it may explain why patients report a difference in their response to generics after they switch from a brand-name.

We're left with two questions: In the interest of saving money without losing effectiveness, how can patients' expectations be managed when they switch to a generic? And when drug makers hike up prices, does the price-tag effect make those drugs suddenly more effective? Points to ponder.

- read the Washington Post story on rising prices
- see Pharmalot's chart on brand-name drugs and their prices
- check out the placebo article in the New York Times
- find more on the placebo study in the Washington Post
- see this LA Times column on drug prices

Related Articles:
Insurers pay docs for generic-switching. Report
Drug makers jack prices up 7.8%. Report
Specialty drugs emerge as key price driver. Report
Generics beat down drug price inflation. Report
Report claims generics could save system $20B. Report

States fight drug reps with reps

Mon, 03 Mar 2008 06:59:55 -0500

It's the case of the hair of the dog that bit you. Or perhaps a fight-fire-with-fire tactic. Either way, some states are employing their own pharma reps to combat Big Pharma's marketing machine. Take Pennsylvania, for instance, which spends $1 million a year on an "unsales" force to try to lower healthcare costs by pushing treatment alternatives such as generic and over-the-counter meds.

Industry lobbyists decry the effort, saying that less expensive remedies may end up costing more in the long term if they're not the best therapy for a patient. But Pennsylvania officials said generics aren't recommended "unless the generic is the better choice," saying that in some cases brand-name drugs are deemed most effective by their program.

But it's not criticism from the industry that could doom the states' efforts. It's the fact that, in contrast to that $1 million spent in Pennsylvania's case, pharma shells out more than $7 billion on direct marketing to docs.

- here's the Washington Post report

Related Articles:
Dr. Drug Rep tells all. Report
Rep decries off-label marketing "loophole." Report

Insurers pay docs for generic-switching

Fri, 25 Jan 2008 06:59:54 -0500

Maybe the folks probing drug company payments to docs should expand their field a bit. Now, health plans are drawing scrutiny for paying physicians to prescribe cheaper generics rather than brand-name drugs. Some are even greasing docs' palms each time they switch patients off branded meds.

Patient advocates and legislators are fired up about it, worried that decisions based at least in part on financial incentives are inherently suspect. One would think that pharma could get fired up, too. After all, drug makers already face enough generic pressure.

According to The Wall Street Journal, the incentive plan that's drawn the most fire is one started last year by Blue Care Network, part of Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan. Primary care docs got $100 for each plan member who switched to a generic statin. Helpfully, the HMO mailed docs a list of patients who were on the brand-name meds Lipitor (Pfizer) and Lescol (Novartis). The HMO spent $2 million on the three-month program--saving $5 million in drug costs in the process. Along the way, the American Medical Association advised docs that such payments could violate antikickback statutes. Now, a legislator in Massachusetts has introduced a bill to "keep [the practice] from spreading."

- read the Wall Street Journal article

UK aims to slice drug prices 10%

Mon, 07 Jan 2008 06:59:58 -0500

A pharma nightmare with an English accent: The UK government wants to slash prices for prescription drugs by 10 percent. Sources told the Financial Times that officials are seeking a $2 billion-plus reduction off the current $21.7 billion annual spending on meds.

On the record, Health Minister Alan Johnson said he's aiming for "substantial savings" in the National Health Services' drug budget by the time a new agreement with drug companies is finalized in June. The drug-budget cuts would be part of an overall cost-reduction plan for the ministry, which has been directed to cut its spending by 3 percent per year.

Drug makers, of course, are none too cheerful about the prospect. The new cuts would come on top of a 7 percent discount in prices that went into effect in 2005, under a pricing deal that was supposed to be valid through 2010. The Financial Times says that pharma may endorse the idea of taking "branded generics"--or brand-name drugs already off patent--out of the pricing scheme. But that concession would have to be matched by the government, namely higher prices for new drugs and quicker adoption of new-to-market products.

- read the report in the Financial Times

Related Articles:
UK accepts J&J's money-back guarantee. Report
NHS fights expensive Alzheimer's drugs. Report

Drug marketing costs double R&D

Fri, 04 Jan 2008 06:59:56 -0500

Every self-respecting pharma exec will tell you: R&D is the industry's peculiar burden, the chief reason why brand-name drugs are so expensive. But the average Joe or Jane consumer thinks that's, er, a lot of bunk. It's marketing that drives the costs of their meds ever upward.

Now, a couple of academics have the figures. After combing through market research, they found that pharma spent $57.5 billion on marketing in 2004--almost twice the $31.5 billion spent on research that year, according to the National Science Foundation. And the research numbers include public funding, not just company expenses.

The data "confirms the public image of a marketing-driven industry," the study authors wrote. It also shows that the industry needs to be redirected toward research and away from brand-building, they wrote. Just how might that redirection happen? They didn't say.

- see this release release
-get the journal article from PLoS Medicine

Related Articles:
Study: DTC ad spending on the rise. Report
10 reforms for drug advertising. Report
FDA to study TV drug ad imagery. Report

Pharma growth sinking to historic low

Thu, 01 Nov 2007 07:59:58 -0400

Here's statistical confirmation of the gloom-and-doom facing Big Pharma. Worldwide sales growth will slow next year to around 5 percent from 6 to 7 percent this year, according to a new report from IMS Health. In the U.S., growth will hit a historic low of 4 to 5 percent as generics march in to battle with brand-name drugs like Johnson & Johnson's Risperdal and Merck's Fosamax. And because of increased FDA scrutiny, new drugs aren't likely to fill the void.

Meanwhile, emerging markets will account for one-quarter of the increase in pharma sales--but they'll be buying generics because they can't afford brand-name meds.

- check out the release from IMS Health
- read the article from the Washington Post

Related Articles:
Moody's downgrades pharma industry. Report
Patent 'cliff' looms for Big Pharma. Report
Generic competition heats up. Report
PwC to pharma: Adapt and invest or die. Report
Is pharma's drug discovery model sustainable? Editorial

ALSO NOTED: Study questions "black box" on droperidol; Amilyn gets pen-injector OK;

Mon, 01 Oct 2007 06:59:50 -0400

> A new Mayo Clinic study seems to show that the FDA's "black box" warning of irregular heartbeat on the antinausea drug droperidol may be unnecessary. Report

> Amilyn Pharmaceuticals got the FDA nod for its pen-injector form of the diabetes drug Symlin. Release

> Lupin of India bought Rubamin Lab, a contract manufacturer, for an undisclosed amount. Report

And Finally... Do TV characters typically name-drop prescription drugs? Apparently so: Brand-name drugs were part of the TV-series plots some 705 times so far this year--and though only one drug maker admits to product placement marketing, the rest may not be far behind. Report

Wal-Mart boosts $4 generic program

Thu, 27 Sep 2007 06:59:57 -0400

The march of the generics continues. Wal-Mart says it's adding 24 new meds to its line-up of $4 prescriptions, including drugs for glaucoma, attention deficient hyperactivity disorder, and fungal infections. Plus, certain fertility and birth control drugs will be available for $9.

Since Wal-Mart unveiled the $4 program last fall, it has come to account for 40 percent of prescriptions filled at the company's pharmacies. A Wal-Mart official says the current list of $4 drugs is "scratching the surface" and that more will likely be added.

The company's also pledging to get new-to-market generics on the list lickety-split. Witness the generic form of Coreg, which was just approved by the FDA--it's already on the list.

- check out Wal-Mart's press release
- read the article from Newsday

Related Articles:
Generics beat down drug price inflation. Report
Wal-Mart slashing generic prices. Report
Wal-Mart expands $4 drug program, Target follows. Report
Should Wal-Mart go into the healthcare business? Report

Court: Pfizer can defend Neurontin patent

Mon, 24 Sep 2007 06:59:56 -0400

Pfizer will get its day in court with Neurontin--and its chance to collect at-risk damages from generics companies that pounced on the drug. A federal appeals court overturned portions of a 2005 summary judgment against Pfizer, which had sued several generics makers for infringing on Neurontin's patent, which doesn't expire until 2017.

Pfizer says it plans to pursue full damages from the generics companies that launched their versions of Neurontin at risk. If Pfizer's patent defense is successful, those companies would have to fork over three times the revenues they reaped from sales of their generic versions. Before Neurontin went generic, Pfizer sold $2 billion worth a year. The generics companies involved in the original suit include Teva, Eon Labs (a Novartis subsidiary), and Apotex.

- read Pfizer's press release
- see Teva's press release
- read this article from Dow Jones

Related Articles:
Pfizer's future rests with biotech. Report
Pfizer's Lipitor patent request rejected. Report
Pfizer honcho details plans to boost sales. Report

Generics beat down drug price inflation

Fri, 21 Sep 2007 06:59:58 -0400

Generics may be the bane of Big Pharma, but they're inflation-fighting ninjas. Over the last 12 months, prescription drug prices edged up by a measly 1 percent--the lowest rate of inflation in three decades. Just two years ago, drug costs were rising at 4.4 percent annually.

The difference? More people are using generics, and generic versions of some of the most common, most popular drugs have come onto the market. And then there's the Wal-Mart effect: the $4 generics program Wal-Mart launched last fall, which quickly spread to competitors.

There's more rah-rah for generics to come, too. Several presidential candidates pin their plans for controlling healthcare costs onto the copycat drugs.

- read this article in The New York Times

Related Articles:
FDA backlog slows generic drug approval. Report
Dr. Reddy's make risky biogenerics move. Report
Generic battle looms for Lipitor. Report
Report claims generics could save system $20B. Report

Analyst: Generics makers sitting pretty

Fri, 07 Sep 2007 06:59:54 -0400

Speaking of generic drug makers, here's a news flash: Their revenue will continue to soar in coming years, according to a top industry analyst from IMS Health.

Global sales of generics already are growing at 14 percent annually, compared with single-digit increases at brand-name drug makers. Medicines worth $12 billion lose patent protection this year, and $20 billion will go unprotected next year.

But, the analyst said, a dearth of innovation in brand-name drugs won't end by hurting Big Pharma--it will wound generics makers, too, because their growth depends on having new drugs to copy. And the rise of generics makers in India and China will bring price competition to the party. None of this is news to alert observers of the industry, but it was said at a conference podium, so that makes it official.

- check out the AP report for more information

Related Articles:
FDA backlog slows generic drug approval. Report
Patent 'cliff' looms for Big Pharma. Report
Democrats to push for generic biotech drugs. Report
Generic competition heats up. Report

Novartis backs out of India R&D deal

Wed, 22 Aug 2007 06:59:54 -0400

Too bad, India. Novartis CEO Daniel Vasella says he's scrapping plans to invest millions in R&D there. The reason? Intellectual property protections aren't adequate in India, Vasella says. Of course Novartis has reason to resent Indian IP rules. Last week, it lost its court bid for patent protection on Glivec, its best-selling leukemia treatment. Under Indian law--Section 3(d), to be exact--drug makers can't get patents for new versions of old medicines, and the Indian Patent Office had ruled that Glivec was just that.

Section 3(d) protects India's many generics makers, which are aggressive about challenging patents and quick to turn out their own versions of vulnerable brand-name drugs. Currently, India's generic forms of Glivec sell for about a tenth the price of Novartis' branded form. But will Section 3(d) keep other companies besides Novartis from investing in India? Trade groups are muttering about stifled innovation, arguing that the drug research often advances bit by bit--the incremental progress Indian law doesn't protect. If other drug makers start looking to China for their R&D instead, India may have to choose between its own home-grown industry and global pharma.

- read the report from the Financial Times
- and the Business Standard looks at the backlash

Related Articles:
Indian court spurns Novartis on patent challenge. Report
Novartis patent challenge spurs protests in India. Report