Generic Benchmarking: Brand Erosion at patent expiry

Published by: Datamonitor

Published: Mar. 15, 2009 - 109 Pages

Table of Contents

CHAPTER 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Scope of the report

Key findings

CHAPTER 2 OVERVIEW OF BRAND EROSION IN THE SEVEN MAJOR MARKETS

Analysis of brand sales and volume erosion in the seven major markets

Erosion of standard oral and parenteral formulations at patent expiry in the seven major markets

Brand erosion in the US market

Brand erosion in the UK

Brand erosion in Germany

Brand erosion in France

Brand erosion in Spain

Brand erosion in Italy

Brand erosion in Japan

Top 10 most eroded brands

Omnicef (cefdinir, Abbott)

Lamisil (terbinafine, Novartis)

Zofran (ondansetron, GlaxoSmithKline)

Zyrtec (cetirizine, Pfizer)

Camptosar (irinotecan, Pfizer)

Mobic (meloxicam, Boehringer Ingelheim)

Coreg (carvedilol, GlaxoSmithKline)

Kytril (granisetron, Roche)

Cerebyx (fosphenytoin, Eisai)

CHAPTER 3 OVERVIEW OF PRICE OF GENERICS VERSUS ORIGINAL BRANDS

Price of generic drugs in the seven major markets

Generics prices in the US

Generics prices in the UK

Generics prices in Germany

Generics prices in France

Generics prices in Italy

Generics prices in Spain

Generics prices in Japan

CHAPTER 4 BRAND EROSION BY VALUE

Brand erosion by value across the seven major markets

Brand erosion by value in the US

Brand erosion by value in the UK

Brand erosion by value in Germany

Brand erosion by value in France

Brand erosion by value in Italy

Brand erosion by value in Spain

Brand erosion by value in Japan

CHAPTER 5 BRAND EROSION BY ATC GROUP

Overview of ATC classification

Brand erosion by ATC group in the US

Brand erosion by ATC group in the UK

Brand erosion by ATC group in Germany

Brand erosion by ATC group in France

Brand erosion by ATC group in Italy

Brand erosion by ATC group in Spain

Brand erosion by ATC group in Japan

CHAPTER 6 REFORMUALTIONS - EFFECTIVE PROTECTION AGAINST GENERIC EROSION?

Overview of reformulations

The effect of generic defense reformulation strategies

Fosamax D did not incentivize enough patients to switch to the follow-on drug

Pravachol’s loss of sales is due to poor head-to-head studies

CHAPTER 7 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Publications and online articles

Datamonitor resources

APPENDIX

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Mean branded standard oral drug value ($) and volume (SU) followinggeneric entry between Q2 2006 and Q2 2008 in the seven majormarkets

Figure 2: Incentives for generic prescribing in the US market

Figure 3: Mean branded standard oral and parenteral drug value ($) andvolume (SU) following generic entry between Q2 2006 and Q2 2008 inthe seven major markets

Figure 4: Mean brand erosion of oral versus parenteral drugs at patent expirybetween Q2 2006 and Q2 2008 in the seven major markets

Figure 5: Mean branded standard oral and parenteral drug value ($) andvolume (SU) following generic entry between Q2 2006 and Q2 2008 inthe US market

Figure 6: US sales of branded meloxicam versus generic competition fromLupin, Teva and Zydus Cadila

Figure 7: Mean branded standard oral and parenteral drug value ($) andvolume (SU) following generic entry between Q2 2006 and Q2 2008 inthe UK

Figure 8: UK sales erosion of Propecia, Proscar, the total brand erosion andgeneric finasteride, Q2 2006-Q2 2008

Figure 9: Mean branded standard oral and parenteral drug value ($) andvolume (SU) following generic entry between Q2 2006 and Q2 2008 inGermany

Figure 10: Sales erosion of Eloxatin versus generic oxaliplatin in Germanybetween Q2 2006 and Q2 2008

Figure 11: Incentives for generic prescribing in the French market

Figure 12: Mean branded standard oral and parenteral drug value ($) andvolume (SU) following generic entry between Q2 2006 and Q2 2008 inFrance

Figure 13: Sales erosion of Norvasc/Amlor and Caduet versus genericcompetition in France, Q2 2007-Q2 2008

Figure 14: Barriers to generic erosion of brands in Spain and Italy

Figure 15: Mean branded standard oral and parenteral drug value ($) andvolume (SU) following generic entry between Q2 2006 and Q2 2008 inSpain

Figure 16: Sales of Kytril in its oral and parenteral formulations versus genericcompetition in Spain, Q2 2006-Q2 2008

Figure 17: Mean branded standard oral and parenteral drug value ($) andvolume (SU) following generic entry between Q2 2006 and Q2 2008 inItaly

Figure 18: Seasonal branded and generic sales erosion of cetirizine in Italy, Q2006-Q2 2008

Figure 19: Branded and generic sales erosion of and oxcarbazepine andzolpidem in Italy, Q2 2006-Q2 2008

Figure 20: Incentives for generic prescribing in the Japanese market

Figure 21: Mean branded standard oral and parenteral drug value ($) andvolume (SU) following generic entry between Q2 2006 and Q2 2008 inJapan

Figure 22: Brand erosion (%) of cabergoline in Germany, Italy, UK and Japan,Q4 2006-Q2 2008

Figure 23: Mean generic price versus mean branded price of standard oraldrugs, one quarter prior to generic entry in the seven major markets,Q2 2006-Q2 2008

Figure 24: Mean generic price versus mean branded price of standard parenteraldrugs, one quarter prior to generic entry, Q2 2006-Q2 2008

Figure 25: Mean generic price versus mean branded price of oral and parenteraldrugs in the US, one quarter prior to generic entry, Q2 2006-Q2 2008

Figure 26: Mean generic price versus mean branded price of oral and parenteraldrugs in the UK, one quarter prior to generic entry, Q2 2006-Q2 2008

Figure 27: Mean generic price versus mean branded price of oral and parenteraldrugs in Germany, one quarter prior to generic entry, Q2 2006-Q2008

Figure 28: Mean generic price versus mean branded price of oral and parenteraldrugs in France, one quarter prior to generic entry, Q2 2006-Q2 2008

Figure 29: Mean generic price versus mean branded price of oral and parenteraldrugs in Italy, one quarter prior to generic entry, Q2 2006-Q2 2008

Figure 30: Mean generic price versus mean branded price of oral and parenteraldrugs in Spain, one quarter prior to generic entry, Q2 2006-Q2 2008

Figure 31: Generic price versus branded price of oral and parenteral drugs inJapan, one quarter prior to generic entry, Q2 2006-Q2 2008

Figure 32: Mean branded drug value ($) erosion following generic entry in theUS, Q2 2006-Q2 2008

Figure 33: Branded drug value ($) erosion following generic entry in the UK, Q2006-Q2 2008

Figure 34: Sales of Coversyl and Coversyl Plus versus total generic perindoprilsales in the UK, Q2 2006-Q2 2008

Figure 35: Branded drug value ($) erosion following generic entry in Germany,Q2 2006-Q2 2008

Figure 36: Branded drug value ($) erosion following generic entry in France, Q2006-Q2 2008

Figure 37: Branded drug value ($) erosion following generic entry in Italy, Q2006-Q2 2008

Figure 38: Branded drug value ($) erosion following generic entry in Spain, Q2006-Q2 2008

Figure 39: Branded drug value ($) erosion following generic entry in Japan, Q2006-Q2 2008

Figure 40: Mean branded erosion (%) of value ($) and volume (SU) according toATC group following generic entry in the US between Q2 2006 andQ2 2008

Figure 41: Mean branded erosion (%) of value ($) and volume (SU) according toATC group following generic entry in the UK between Q2 2006 andQ2 2008

Figure 42: Mean branded erosion (%) of value ($) and volume (SU) according toATC group following generic entry in Germany between Q2 2006 andQ2 2008

Figure 43: Mean branded erosion (%) of value ($) and volume (SU) according toATC group following generic entry in France between Q2 2006 andQ2 2008

Figure 44: Mean branded erosion (%) of value ($) and volume (SU) according toATC group following generic entry in Italy between Q2 2006 and Q2008

Figure 45: Mean branded erosion (%) of value ($) and volume (SU) according toATC group following generic entry in Spain between Q2 2006 and Q2008

Figure 46: Mean branded erosion (%) of value ($) and volume (SU) according toATC group following generic entry in Japan between Q2 2006 and Q2008

Figure 47: Mean branded erosion (%) of value ($) and volume (SU) forreformulated drugs - Ambien, Mavik, Focalin and Coreg, Q2 2006-Q2008

Figure 48: Mean brand erosion of Novartis’s Focalin (dexmethylphenidate) for itsoral standard and oral extended formulations, Q2 2006-Q2 2008

Figure 49: Mean brand erosion of GlaxoSmithKline’s Coreg (carvedilol) for itsoral standard and oral extended formulations, Q2 2006-Q2 2008

Figure 50: Sales of Fosamax and Fosamax Plus D versus generic alendronicacid in the US market, Q2 2006-Q2 2008

Figure 51: Sales of Pravachol and Pravigard against generic competition inFrance, Q2 2006-Q2 2008

Figure 52: Drugs experiencing generic erosion between Q1 2006 and Q2 2007

Figure 53: Erosion curves for each drug experiencing generic entry

Figure 54: Mean erosion curve for drugs A, B, and C experiencing generic entry

Figure 55: Mean branded erosion of value ($) and volume (SU) for ATC group A(endocrine, metabolic and genetic disorders), Q2 2006-Q2 2008

Figure 56: Mean branded erosion of value ($) and volume (SU) for ATC group C(cardiovascular), Q2 2006-Q2 2008

Figure 57: Mean branded erosion of value ($) and volume (SU) for ATC group D(immunology and inflammation), Q2 2006-Q2 2008

Figure 58: Mean branded erosion of value ($) and volume (SU) for ATC group G(urology and gender-specific health), Q2 2006-Q2 2008

Figure 59: Mean branded erosion of value ($) and volume (SU) for ATC group J(infectious diseases), Q2 2006-Q2 2008

Figure 60: Mean branded erosion of value ($) and volume (SU) for ATC group L(oncology), Q2 2006-Q2 2008

Figure 61: Mean branded erosion of value ($) and volume (SU) for ATC group M(musculoskeletal), Q2 2006-Q2 2008

Figure 62: Mean branded erosion of value ($) and volume (SU) for ATC group N(central nervous system), Q2 2006-Q2 2008

Figure 63: Mean branded erosion of value ($) and volume (SU) for ATC group R(respiratory), Q2 2006-Q2 2008

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Top 10 most eroded brands after 6 months of generic entry , Q2 2006-Q2

Abstract

• As soon as a brand loses patent protection, generic drugs rapidly flood the market to offer generic versions of the branded drug at a cheaper price. This results in patients shifting to the generic drug and erosion of branded sales
• Looming patent expiries (and the so-called “patent cliff”) are fast approaching, resulting in a $140 billion loss in sales for branded Pharma by 2016
• The severity and rate of erosion differs from country to country, depending on the incentives offered for generic drugs
• This report is a follow-on from last year’s “Benchmarking Patent Expiries” report (DMHC2290) - April 2007 - can be used as an upsell product

• Chapter 1: Executive summary
• Chapter 2: Overview of brand erosion in the seven major markets
• Chapter 3: Overview of price of generics versus original brands
• Chapter 4: Brand erosion by value
• Chapter 5: Brand erosion by ATC group
• Chapter 6: Reformulations: effective protection against generic erosion?

• US, UK and Germany are prone to the most severe brand erosion immediately after patent expiry. The US saw the strongest erosion reflecting the higher levels of generic substitution in the US compared to other markets.
• Across all markets, drugs within the highest value group were subject to the most intense generic erosion as this offers the largest and most profitable market.
• The most heavily eroded ATC group was the respiratory drugs as this class has been subject to heavy generization and prescription-to-OTC drug switches in an effort to retain revenues.

About MarketResearch.com
MarketResearch.com is an online aggregator selling over 250,000 market research reports, company profiles and country profiles from over 650 research firms. Our reports will provide you with the critical business and competitive intelligence you need for strategic planning and marketing research. Coverage includes the US, UK, Europe, Asia and global markets.