2019 Global Biopharma RD Productivity And Growth Ranking

An analysis of the R&D productivity of the world’s 30 largest pharmaceutical companies …

Download this article

In Vivo Biopharma RD Productivity-Growth 2018

In 2017, R&D productivity of the top-30 pharmaceutical companies had decreased for the first time since 2014, according to ….


2019 Rare Diseases and Orphan Products Breakthrough Summit

The aim of this meeting was to facilitate discussion on the most current and urgent topics related to rare diseases and orphan products, to drive innovation, collaboration, advocacy and research

Download this article

Financier – M&A in biopharma – why bigger is not better

Numerous studies by academics and consultants demonstrate that M&A, on average, destroys value. A recent study performed on the Russe II 3000 index from 2001 to 2013 shows that most M&A is dilutive to earnings growth over an extended period post-merger. …

Download this article

In Vivo Biopharma RD Productivity-Growth 2017

This is our fourth annual survey of pharma R&D productivity. Last year we noted that there has been a year-on-year increase in R&D productivity to the tune of 46% from 2014 to 2016. However this trend has not continued in 2017 …

Download this article

Focus on 2017

Medicine Maker, January 2017 –
It seems likely that 2016 will go down as one of the most eventful years in modern history, but what did the pharma industry make of it? Here, we quiz a number of past contributors to The Medicine Maker for their opinions on 2016 – and ask them what priorities and resolutions the industry should focus on for 2017 –

Download this article more

In Vivo Biopharma RD Productivity-Growth 2016

CATENION updates its annual list of the year’s top pharma R&D performers, based on R&D productivity and growth. This year Regeneron shoots to the top and Gilead drops to third place

Download this article

Organising for creativity and innovation – lessons from the biopharmaceutical industry

Financier worldwide, December 2016

The biopharma industry is arguably the most knowledge intense industry of all. Human creativity ….

Download this article

Biopharma’s Brave New Biology

The Medicine Maker – January 2016 –

We live in exciting times for the biopharma industry. The 100-year-old promise of cancer immunotherapy turning cancer into a chronic (if not curable) disease seems within reach in selected indications. …

Download this article

Car-T cell therapy, looking beyond the hype!

While CAR-Ts have already demonstrated convincing efficacy in a specific setting, the jury is still out on whether they are a ‘game-changer’ for oncology as a whole and can justify current valuations and investor interest.

Download this article

Value-based R&D Pharma Productivity 2015 – Oncology and Hep C drive top performers

In Vivo – Biopharma R&D, December 2015

Has biopharma R&D productivity increased since last year’s analysis? (See “Value-Based Pharma R&D Productivity: Is There A Sweet Spot?” — IN VIVO, June 2014.) Who are the new entries into the elite top-five group, and who has dropped out? Is the acceleration in innovation, indicated by the increased number of breakthrough designations and FDA approvals, a direct result of improving R&D productivity in our sample of the 30 largest biopharmas?

Download this article

Global biopharma between stagnation and outperformance

Financier worldwide, December 2015
Looking at the market appreciation of biopharmaceutical companies during the last 2-3 years (biopharma share index, IPOs, funding flows) it is clear that this industry is back in the spotlight of investors. While the MSCI pharma/biotech index had risen some 100 percent from 1996 to 2011, it has added another 240 percent (+340 percent since 1996) in just the last four years.

Download this article

Future-proofing old school pharma with new biology

DDW insights, November 2015

It is seems just about every week one of the major news and analysis publications such as The Economist, The New York Times, FORBES, TIME or some other major  ublication drills into the hotbutton issue of the perceived disparity between oncology drug pricing and medical-economic value. It is a situation that is undeniably acute considering the
following; …

published with kind permission of Drug Discovery World (

Download this article

Value-Based Pharma R&D Productivity: Is There A Scalable Model?

IN VIVO, October 2014

The superior R&D and growth performance of companies like Celgene, Gilead, or Biogen can be attributed to a number of factors such as the size of the R&D budget, a high degree of portfolio focus, a good mixture of internal and external innovation sourcing, but most importantly a strong culture, leadership, and the ability to attract the right people.

Download this article

Value-Based Pharma R&D Productivity: Is There A Sweet Spot?

IN VIVO, June 2014

What do Gilead, Biogen, and Celgene have in common? Qualities to be the top three drugmakers ranked by both R&D productivity and growth, according to a novel method for measuring such criteria that management consulting firm Catenion says offers insights for achieving such success.

Download this article

Trends in the Evaluation of Biotech Development Candidates

pharmind Pharm. Ind. 76, Nr.9 2014

Drug development inarguably is a risky business, especially for biotech companies pursuing novel approaches, and having only a small portfolio further aggravates overall risk of failure at a corporate level. Being able to carry out a standardised, fact-based evaluation of development candidates becomes a crucial factor for decision-making in many contexts e. g. internal portfolio investments, fund-raising, deciding on a project strategy or preparing for out-licensing.

Download this article

What Can Biopharma Learn From Apple?

IN VIVO, January 2014

The restructuring of pharmaceutical R&D organizations has failed to address fundamental issues that afflict R&D across several industries. Most of this shortfall can be attributed to a dearth of effective leadership within the C-suites of the drug industry

Download this article

Rising-up Part 2 – Integrating payer needs into R&D decision making

European Biopharmaceutical Review, January 2014

Payers worldwide are under increasing pressure to reign in continuously rising healthcare costs. In this article, we will discuss a methodology that pragmatically integrates payer needs into R&D decision-making, and highlights a project’s future sales-at-risk within various payer scenarios. This then allows for the cost-benefit evaluation of various options which can mitigate this risk. Furthermore, the methodology can be used to answer important practical questions such as; what is the estimated maximum sales value of a particular patient segment in the seven major markets? How would this change upon introducing a value-based pricing system into a particular market? This article follows on from part one of the series which outlines the drivers of a payer dominated world.

Download this article

Rising-up Part 1 – The rise of a payer dominated market

European Biopharmaceutical Review, October 2013

Across the globe it has become essential for payers to gain control over dramatically rising healthcare costs. This trend, in combination with three other key drivers, is resulting in the decline of the ‘free-pricing’ of pharmaceuticals and the rise of value-based pricing, particularly in the European Union (EU). In this article we discuss each of these factors and highlight how recent developments suggest that value-based pricing is coming to the US, the world’s largest pharmaceutical market. Part two of the series focuses on a practical methodology for integrating payer needs into R&D decision making.

Download this article

Adaptive Licensing – Maximising Value

International Pharmaceutical Industry, Vol 5. Issue 4 (Winter 2013)

Applying adaptive licensing strategies can significantly increase the value of R&D projects. Although regulatory frameworks do not include adaptive pathways yet, some strategies already work within the existing regulations and regulators encourage pilot schemes. Thus, a new opportunity to optimise R&D portfolio value has arisen.

Download this article

Gilead, Celgene, Biogen Head List of Most Productive Biopharmas

Enhancing Strategic Focus

European Biopharmaceutical Review, April 2012

Situated somewhere between classic academic research and the biotech industries, translational research institutions require portfolio management that is pragmatic, flexible, and holistic enough to reconcile high project heterogeneity, plus is able to ensure adequate funding and prioritisation of the most promising translational research areas and projects.

Download this article

The ‘Biotechisation’ of Pharma

Revitalizing portfolio decision-making at Merck Serono S.A. – Geneva

Journal of Commercial Biotechnology, Vol 17. Nr 1 (January 2011)

Comprehensive, metric-based portfolio management yields well-known benefits such as increased transparency and the potential for greater objectivity in decision-making. However, the research and development (R&D)-driven characteristics of the pharma and biotech space call for further refinement of general techniques now in use. Because of the years-long timeline for the R&D of products and treatments, and because of similar horizons for testing and for securing regulatory approval, the growth, stability, and even survival of companies in this space are especially sensitive to the quality of portfolio management. In this article, we (1) briefly describe the history of portfolio management and the uneven results of its application in the R&D-centric pharma and biotech space; (2) identify eight factors which can limit the impact and quality of portfolio management in the space; (3) document a four-step process for portfolio management that directly addresses these factors; and (4) document the results of the implementation of this process in the post-merger period at Merck Serono S.A.- Geneva.

Download this article

Evolving an Edge

European Biopharmaceutical Review, January 2011

Proof-of-concept (PoC) has become a widely used phrase in the biopharmaceutical space. Some pharma companies have gone as far as embedding the principle at the organisational level by dividing their structures into a pre-PoC part (discovery and early development) and a post-PoC part (full development). GlaxoSmithKline, Bayer Schering, Merck Serono and Roche are examples of companies that have implemented organisational variants of this approach. The goal of these re-structuring efforts was to realise more effective decision-making that would be better aligned with the nature of the R&D process and governance than the traditional division of the operating model into discovery and clinical development.

Download this article