|
|
Therapeutic Antibodies: Capitalizing on the Fully Human WavePublished by: Datamonitor Published: Dec. 16, 2003 - 346 Pages Table of ContentsTABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 Scope 3 Datamonitor’s Insight into the Therapeutic Antibodies market in 2003 4 The market will triple in value over the next five years from $5.4 billion in 2002 to $16.7 billion in 2008. Although the growth will rely on the rise of humanized and fully human antibodies, chimeric products, led by Remicade and Rituxan, will continue to dominate market share in 2008. 5 Oncology will continue to be the leading therapy area both in terms of commercial success and pipeline development. However, while the pipeline for autoimmune is currently half the size of that for oncology, commercial products for this therapy area will show the highest revenue growth and achieve almost equal returns with oncology in 2008. 7 The Ab market is heavily reliant on a few key drugs for the majority of market value, with five products accounting for 95% of the market in 2002. Five Ab blockbusters will still account for 68% of the market in 2008, with all but two of the 16 Ab products forecast to generate sales over $200m marketed to some extent by a top 20 pharma company. 8 Technology providers, emerging drug developers and fully integrated players are driving the Ab biotech sector towards integration and market expansion. Success will require strategies targeting lower development times, well-protected patents, higher molecular engineering sophistication, cost efficient manufacturing and improved drug delivery 10 CHAPTER 2 KEY DYNAMICS OF THE THERAPEUTIC ANTIBODY MARKET 28 Introduction 28 Historical development of the antibody-oriented biotech business model 28 Blending innovation and integration for success 30 Company evolution - the current antibody development model 31 The evolution of innovation - fulfilling unmet need 32 Reducing development time - optimising target selection 33 Development platform evolution - humanized and fully human therapies take over 39 Advancing antibody engineering - beyond the traditional molecule 43 Single or multiple platform - focused expertise versus risk diversification 46 Antibody manufacturing - innovation meets economics 47 Drug delivery 54 Business model evolution- optimizing commercial potential 55 From service provision to full integration 56 Virtual pharma - alliance networking is key to growth 60 CHAPTER 3 MARKET ANALYSIS 66 Introduction 66 Segmentation of technology platforms 66 Commercial market size and growth 68 The current marketed portfolio 68 Future monoclonal antibody market potential 73 Antibody development programs 79 Current marketed and pipeline technology distribution 80 Current marketed and pipeline therapy area distribution 83 The relationship between therapy area and technology 86 CHAPTER 4 COMPANY ANALYSIS 87 Introduction 87 Company dynamics 87 Current position 87 Forecast position in 2008 88 Technology focus 89 Therapeutic focus 90 Financial positioning 91 Abbott 97 Monoclonal antibodies and Abbott’s business model 97 Assessment of Abbott’s strategic position 98 Abbott’s antibody alliances 100 Abbott’s technological focus 102 Abbott’s portfolio 103 Abgenix 109 Abgenix’s antibody business model 109 Assessment of Abgenix’s strategic position 112 Abgenix’s antibody alliances 114 Abgenix’s technology 116 Abgenix’s portfolio 118 Antisoma 124 Antisoma’s antibody business model 124 Assessment of Antisoma’s strategic position 125 Antisoma’s alliance network 127 Antisoma’s technology 128 Antisoma’s portfolio 129 Biogen-IDEC 134 Monoclonal antibodies and Biogen’s business model 134 Assessment of Biogen-IDEC’s strategic position 136 Biogen-IDEC’s antibody alliances 139 Biogen-IDEC’s antibody technology 142 Biogen-IDEC’s antibody products 144 Cambridge Antibody Technology 156 Monoclonal antibodies and CAT’s business model 156 Assessment of CAT’s strategic position 159 CAT’s antibody alliances 162 CAT’s technology 167 CAT’s portfolio 169 Celltech 179 Monoclonal antibodies and Celltech’s business model 179 Assessment of Celltech’s strategic position 180 Celltech’s alliance network 183 Celltech’s technology 186 Celltech’s antibody portfolio 187 Genentech 193 Monoclonal antibodies and Genentech’s business model 193 Assessment of Genentech’s strategic position 195 Genentech’s antibody alliances 199 Genentech’s technology 202 Genentech’s portfolio 203 Genmab 216 Monoclonal antibodies and Genmab’s business model 216 Assessment of Genmab’s strategic position 217 Genmab’s antibody alliances 220 Genmab’s technology 223 Genmab’s portfolio 224 ImClone Systems 231 Monoclonal antibodies and ImClone’s business model 231 Assessment of ImClone’s strategic position 232 Strengths 232 Weaknesses 233 ImClone’s alliance network 233 ImClone’s Technology 234 Therapeutic focus 235 ImClone’s portfolio 236 Immunomedics 242 Monoclonal antibodies and Immunomedics’ business model 242 Assessment of Immunomedics’ strategic position 244 Immunomedics’s antibody alliances 247 Immunomedics’ technology 249 Immunomedics’ portfolio 251 Johnson & Johnson 259 Monoclonal antibodies and Johnson & Johnson’s business model 259 Assessment of Johnson & Johnson’s strategic position 261 Johnson & Johnson’s antibody alliances 263 Johnson & Johnson’s technology 264 Johnson & Johnson’s portfolio 265 Medarex 271 Medarex’s antibody business model 271 Assessment of Medarex’s strategic position 271 Medarex’s antibody alliances 273 Medarex’s technology 275 Medarex’s portfolio 278 MedImmune 286 Monoclonal antibodies and MedImmune’s business model 286 Assessment of MedImmune’s strategic position 289 MedImmune’s antibody alliances 292 MedImmune’s antibody technology focus 293 MedImmune’s portfolio 294 Protein Design Labs 303 Monoclonal antibodies and PDL’s business model 303 Assessment of PDL’s strategic position 305 PDL’s antibody alliances 309 PDL’s technology 312 PDL’s portfolio 313 Seattle Genetics 320 Monoclonal antibodies and Seattle Genetics’ business model 320 Assessment of Seattle Genetics’ strategic position 321 Seattle Genetics’ antibody alliance network 322 Seattle Genetics’ technology 324 Seattle Genetics’ portfolio 325 CHAPTER 5 APPENDIX A: VIRTUAL DIALOGUE WITH ANTIBODY OPINION LEADERS 330 Key messages 330 Innovation - realizing antibody potential 331 Success rates and development time 331 Optimising antibody development 332 Manufacturing evolution 338 Integration and growth - guiding commercial success 339 CHAPTER 6 APPENDIX B 343 Acknowledgments 343 Report methodology 343 Exchange rates 343 About Datamonitor 344 About Datamonitor Healthcare 344 Datamonitor Healthcare’s research and analysis methodologies 345 Datamonitor Healthcare’s therapy area capabilities 345 Datamonitor’s Competitive Intelligence Business Unit 346 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Marketed antibodies 2003 69 Table 2: Sales and growth of antibodies by technology, 2002 70 Table 3: Sales and growth of antibodies by therapy area, 2002 71 Table 4: Forecast antibody market in 2008 73 Table 5: Sales and growth of antibodies by technology, 2008 75 Table 6: Sales and growth of antibodies by therapy area, 2008 77 Table 7: Antibody related sales in 2001 and 2002 87 Table 8: Forecast antibody sales in 2008 88 Table 9: Sales of Abbott’s marketed antibody products, 2001-02 104 Table 10: Abbott’s antibody pipeline, 2003 107 Table 11: Abbott’s forecast antibody sales, 2003-08 108 Table 12: Key products in Abgenix’s pipeline, 2003 119 Table 13: ABX-EGF’s clinical trials, 2003 120 Table 14: Antisoma’s antibody pipeline, 2003 130 Table 15: Antisoma’s forecast antibody sales 133 Table 16: Sales of Biogen-IDEC’s marketed antibody products, 2001-02 145 Table 17: Biogen-IDEC’s antibody pipeline, 2003 150 Table 18: Biogen-IDEC’s forecast antibody sales, 2003-08 155 Table 19: Sales of CAT’s marketed antibody products, 2001-02 170 Table 20: CAT’s antibody pipeline 172 Table 21: CAT’s forecast antibody sales, 2003-08 178 Table 22: Celltech’s key pipeline antibodies, 2003 188 Table 23: Datamonitor and analyst consensus forecasts for sales of CDP 870, 2005-08 192 Table 24: Sales of Genentech’s marketed antibody products 2001-02 204 Table 25: Genentech’s antibody pipeline, 2003 209 Table 26: Genentech’s forecast antibody sales 215 Table 27: Genmab’s antibody pipeline, 2003 225 Table 28: Genmab’s forecast antibody sales 230 Table 29: ImClone’s key pipeline therapeutics, 2003 236 Table 30: ImClone’s forecast antibody sales 241 Table 31: Immunomedics’ antibody pipeline, 2003 252 Table 32: Immunomedics’s forecast antibody sales, 2003-08 258 Table 33: Sales of Johnson & Johnson’s marketed antibody products, 2001-02 266 Table 34: Johnson & Johnson’s forecast antibody sales 270 Table 35: Key products in Medarex’s pipeline, 2003 279 Table 36: Forecast sales for Phase III developmental drugs in ovarian cancer, 2003-08 281 Table 37: Medarex’s forecast antibody sales 285 Table 38: MedImmune’s alliance network, 2003 292 Table 39: MedImmune’s marketed antibody portfolio 295 Table 40: MedImmune’s key pipeline antibodies, 2003 297 Table 41: Forecast sales for MedImmune’s antibody products, 2003-08 302 Table 42: Sales of PDL’s marketed products, 2001-02 314 Table 43: PDL’s antibody pipeline, 2003 315 Table 44: Seattle Genetics’ key pipeline products, 2003 326 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: The structure of Datamonitor’s analysis of the therapeutic antibody market 3 Figure 2: Technological exposure of the AB clinical pipeline, 2003 5 Figure 3: New product approval trajectories in terms of technological exposure 6 Figure 4: Therapeutic focus of antibody development, 2003 7 Figure 5: Contribution of blockbuster Abs to the sector’s total ethical revenues, 2002 and 2008 9 Figure 6: The Ab sector’s move from tech provision to full integration 10 Figure 7: Evolution of the antibody-oriented business model 28 Figure 8: Key strategic factors that will affect the antibody sector 30 Figure 9: Five critical steps to develop a commercially attractive Ab production engine 32 Figure 10: Commercial and developmental therapeutic focus of the therapeutic antibody market 37 Figure 11: New antibody approvals according to therapeutic focus, 2003-08 38 Figure 12: The evolution of antibody engineering technologies 40 Figure 13: Technological exposure of the antibody-based pipeline, 2003 41 Figure 14: New product approval trajectories in terms of technological exposure 42 Figure 15: The Ab sector’s move from tech provision to full integration 56 Figure 16: Technology exposure in 2003 70 Figure 17: Therapy area exposure in 2003 72 Figure 18: Technology exposure in 2008 76 Figure 19: Therapy area exposure in 2008 78 Figure 20: The marketed and pipeline antibody market by phase, 2003 79 Figure 21: Technology exposure across whole market, 2003 80 Figure 22: Technology exposure across development phases, 2003 81 Figure 23: Programs by technology type, 2003 82 Figure 24: Therapy area exposure across whole market, 2003 83 Figure 25: Therapy area exposure across development phases, 2003 84 Figure 26: Programs by therapy area, 2003 85 Figure 27: Technology exposure of key antibody companies 89 Figure 28: Therapy area exposure of key antibody companies 90 Figure 29: Revenues of Biotech companies with antibody exposure, 2002 92 Figure 30: Cost ratios of companies with antibody exposure, 2002 93 Figure 31: Net profit margin of companies with antibody exposure, 2002 94 Figure 32: Turnover of cash for companies with antibody exposure, 2002 95 Figure 33: Abbott’s monoclonal antibody exposure, FY2002 97 Figure 34: Abbott’s strategic position within monoclonal antibodies 98 Figure 35: Abbott’s antibody alliances, 2003 100 Figure 36: Abbott’s technology exposure, 2003 102 Figure 37: Abbott’s therapeutic exposure, 2003 103 Figure 38: Abgenix’s strategic position 112 Figure 39: Abgenix’s antibody alliances, 2003 114 Figure 40: Abgenix’s technology exposure, 2003 116 Figure 41: Abgenix’s therapeutic exposure, 2003 118 Figure 42: Antisoma’s strategic position 125 Figure 43: Medarex’s antibody alliances, 2003 127 Figure 44: Antisoma’s technology exposure 128 Figure 45: Development stage of Antisoma’s oncology portfolio, 2003 129 Figure 46: Biogen-IDEC’s monoclonal antibody exposure, FY2002 134 Figure 47: Biogen-IDEC’s strategic position within monoclonal antibodies 136 Figure 48: Biogen-IDEC’s antibody alliances, 2003 139 Figure 49: Biogen-IDEC’s technology exposure, 2003 142 Figure 50: Biogen-IDEC’s therapeutic exposure, 2003 144 Figure 51: CAT’s strategic position within monoclonal antibodies 159 Figure 52: CAT’s antibody alliances, 2003 162 Figure 53: CAT’s technology exposure, 2003 167 Figure 54: CAT’s therapeutic exposure, 2003 169 Figure 55: Assessment of Celltech’s strategic position 180 Figure 56: Celltech’s alliance network 183 Figure 57: Celltech’s technology exposure 186 Figure 58: Celltech’s therapeutic focus 187 Figure 59: Genentech’s monoclonal antibody exposure, FY2002 193 Figure 60: Genentech’s strategic position within monoclonal antibodies 195 Figure 61: Genentech’s antibody alliances 199 Figure 62: Genentech’s technology exposure, 2003 202 Figure 63: Genentech’s therapeutic exposure, 2003 203 Figure 64: Genmab’s strategic position within monoclonal antibodies 217 Figure 65: Genmab’s antibody alliances, 2003 220 Figure 66: Genmab’s technology exposure, 2003 223 Figure 67: Genmab’s therapeutic exposure, 2003 224 Figure 68: ImClone’s strategic position 232 Figure 69: ImClone’s alliance network 233 Figure 70: ImClone’s technology exposure 234 Figure 71: ImClone’s therapeutic focus 235 Figure 72: Immunomedics’ strategic position within monoclonal antibodies 244 Figure 73: Immunomedics’s antibody alliances, 2003 247 Figure 74: Immunomedics’ technology exposure, 2003 249 Figure 75: Immunomedics’ therapeutic exposure, 2003 251 Figure 76: Johnson & Johnson’s monoclonal antibody exposure, FY2002 259 Figure 77: Johnson & Johnson’s strategic position within monoclonal antibodies 261 Figure 78: Johnson & Johnson’s antibody alliances, 2003 263 Figure 79: Johnson & Johnson’s technology exposure, 2003 264 Figure 80: Johnson & Johnson’s therapeutic exposure, 2003 265 Figure 81: Medarex’s strategic position 272 Figure 82: Medarex’s antibody alliances, 2003 273 Figure 83: Medarex’s technology exposure, 2003 275 Figure 84: Therapeutic focus of Medarex’s antibody portfolio, 2003 278 Figure 85: Contribution of MedImmune’s antibodies to ethical sales, 2002-08 287 Figure 86: MedImmune’s strategic position 289 Figure 87: MedImmune’s technology exposure, 2003 293 Figure 88: MedImmune’s therapeutic focus, 2003 294 Figure 89: PDL’s strategic position within monoclonal antibodies 305 Figure 90: PDL’s antibody alliances, 2003 309 Figure 91: PDL’s technology exposure, 2003 312 Figure 92: PDL therapeutic exposure, 2003 313 Figure 93: Seattle Genetics’ strategic position 321 Figure 94: Seattle Genetics’ alliance network 322 Figure 95: Seattle Genetics’ technology exposure, 2003 324 Figure 96: Development stage of Seattle Genetics’ oncology portfolio, 2003 325 AbstractIntroductionTherapeutic antibodies form one of the fastest growing segments of the pharmaceutical market, expected to more than triple in value between 2002 and 2008. The success of current marketed products has led to an escalation in antibody development, with more than 370 programs currently in the pipeline. Evolutions in innovation and business model dynamics will drive the sector’s dominant position. Scope Benchmarking of the current and future antibody market, by technology and therapeutic focus, in terms of number of projects and dollar value Full profiles of 15 leading antibody players, encompassing company strategy, alliance networking, portfolio and pipeline analysis Analysis of market trends and future opportunities for both biotech and pharmaceutical players, with case study analysis A virtual dialogue based on extensive interviews with leading players, including Symphogen, CAT, MorphoSys, Affibody, Domantis, Medarex and Genway Report Highlights The therapeutic antibody market will triple in size over the next five years with 21 new products, led by humanized and fully human platforms, launching between 2003-08. However, in terms of market share, chimeric antibodies led by Remicade and Rituxan will continue to dominate. Achieving a strong competitive position will require a high degree of innovation. This must be achieved by lowering development times, innovative molecular engineering, robust intellectual property protection and the development of cost-effective manufacturing. Reasons to Purchase Benchmark your position within the antibody market and identify the optimum strategy for future technological and supply chain management Identify the opportunities provided by current and future innovation evolution to effectively plan your product and technology licensing strategies Optimize your market penetration through comprehensive knowledge of current sales, growth drivers and corporate dynamics of the antibodies market Get Full Details About This Report >> |
|
|||
|
About MarketResearch.com
|
||||