PARP Inhibitors Drug Therapy Market by Drug (Niraparib, Olaparib, Rucaparib), Indication (Breast Cancer, Ovarian Cancer, Pancreatic Cancer), Line Of Therapy, Treatment Setting, Therapy Type, Patient Age Group, End User, Distribution Channel - Global Forec
Description
The PARP Inhibitors Drug Therapy Market was valued at USD 7.32 billion in 2024 and is projected to grow to USD 7.80 billion in 2025, with a CAGR of 9.47%, reaching USD 15.11 billion by 2032.
Comprehensive introduction to PARP inhibitor therapy highlighting mechanism, clinical relevance across tumor types, and evolving role in precision oncology
PARP inhibitors represent a class of targeted therapies that exploit defects in DNA damage repair pathways to selectively impair tumor cell survival, offering a therapeutic avenue that complements standard cytotoxic and immuno-oncology approaches. Since their clinical introduction, these agents have proven particularly relevant in tumors characterized by homologous recombination deficiencies and BRCA mutations, extending their clinical relevance beyond a single histology and into a multi-indication oncology strategy that spans breast, ovarian, pancreatic, and prostate cancers.
This introduction frames the contemporary clinical and commercial context for PARP inhibitor therapy by emphasizing mechanism-driven patient selection, the expansion of companion diagnostics, and the increasing interplay between monotherapy and combination regimens. It also sets the stage for deeper analysis of regulatory pathways, clinical evidence generation, and operational considerations that influence development and access. As precision medicine continues to evolve, stakeholders must reconcile scientific opportunity with pragmatic constraints across manufacturing, reimbursement, and real-world evidence collection to translate biological rationale into sustainable patient benefit.
Transformative shifts redefining PARP inhibitor clinical pathways through biomarker stratification, combination regimens, and diagnostic-enabled treatment decisions
The landscape for PARP inhibitors has shifted from a niche targeted therapy to a multifaceted platform shaped by biomarker-driven approvals, broadened indication sets, and intensified combination strategies with agents such as immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted kinase inhibitors. These transformative shifts are driven by a deeper understanding of DNA repair biology, which has catalyzed regulatory flexibility for biomarker-enriched populations and accelerated the adoption of companion diagnostics that stratify responders more accurately.
Concurrently, clinical development pathways have diversified: maintenance settings and earlier-stage disease interventions are being actively explored alongside traditional treatment lines, while adaptive trial designs and seamless phase transitions are enabling more efficient evidence generation. Commercial models have adapted in parallel, with payers increasingly requiring real-world outcome data and value-based contracting to manage high-cost specialty therapies. Taken together, these dynamics illustrate how scientific advances, regulatory innovation, and payer expectations are converging to redefine how PARP inhibitors are developed, evaluated, and delivered to patients.
Assessing the cumulative effects of United States tariffs in 2025 on PARP inhibitor supply chains, manufacturing economics, and global access dynamics
The cumulative effects of tariff adjustments implemented in the United States in 2025 have introduced a set of operational and strategic headwinds for stakeholders involved in the development, manufacture, and distribution of PARP inhibitors. Increased import duties on active pharmaceutical ingredients, specialized reagents, and medical devices can elevate upstream production costs, prompting manufacturers to reassess supply chain architectures and vendor diversification strategies. In response, many organizations are accelerating nearshoring initiatives and building redundancy into procurement channels to mitigate exposure to tariff volatility and to preserve production continuity.
Beyond direct cost implications, tariff-driven shifts can influence the timing and geography of clinical trial supply logistics, particularly for multinational studies that require cold-chain transport and just-in-time manufacturing. Payers and procurement departments may seek contract renegotiations or impose stricter formulary controls to offset higher acquisition costs, which in turn affects pricing negotiations and access pathways. To navigate this environment, manufacturers and health systems are increasingly prioritizing scenario planning, cost-to-serve analyses, and collaborative contracting frameworks that spread risk and align incentives across the value chain.
Key segmentation insights synthesizing indication-specific, drug-level, therapy-line, care-setting, end-user, distribution, therapy-type, and age-group perspectives
A nuanced segmentation framework is essential to translate heterogeneous clinical evidence into actionable commercial and clinical strategies. When segmenting by indication, consideration must be given to Breast Cancer, Ovarian Cancer, Pancreatic Cancer, and Prostate Cancer, with breast cancer further refined by receptor type into hormone receptor positive and triple negative subgroups and ovarian cancer further characterized by biomarker status including BRCA mutated, HRD, and non-HRD populations; pancreatic cancer segmentation must reflect stage with advanced and early stage cohorts, while prostate cancer should be parsed by metastatic and non-metastatic stages. In addition to indication-level granularity, drug-level segmentation across niraparib, olaparib, rucaparib, and talazoparib highlights differences in label scope, safety profiles, and combination potential.
Line of therapy segmentation across first line, maintenance, and subsequent line frames clinical positioning and evidentiary needs, while treatment setting differentiation between inpatient and outpatient environments informs resource utilization and administration logistics. End-user segmentation encompassing hospitals, retail pharmacies, and specialty clinics determines distribution relationships and commercial engagement models, and distribution channel distinctions among hospital pharmacies, online pharmacies, and retail pharmacies affect accessibility and supply-chain design. Finally, therapy type segmentation between combination therapy and monotherapy and patient age group segmentation of adults and elderly guide trial design, safety monitoring, and adherence strategies. Together, these layers create a multidimensional view that supports targeted clinical development, reimbursement strategies, and commercial execution.
Regional dynamics and strategic differentiators across Americas, Europe Middle East & Africa, and Asia-Pacific shaping access, regulation, and clinical adoption of PARP therapies
Regional dynamics exert a strong influence on regulatory pathways, reimbursement decisions, and clinical adoption for PARP inhibitors across three macro geographies: Americas, Europe, Middle East & Africa, and Asia-Pacific. In the Americas, regulatory agencies and payers tend to emphasize robust clinical trial evidence and real-world effectiveness, while also supporting accelerated pathways for biomarker-driven therapies; commercial strategies must therefore balance evidence generation with payer engagement and patient access programs.
Across Europe, Middle East & Africa, national health technology assessment bodies and varied reimbursement frameworks necessitate tailored value demonstration and portfolio planning, with some markets prioritizing cost-effectiveness assessments and others relying on negotiated access agreements. In the Asia-Pacific region, heterogeneity in regulatory maturity and healthcare infrastructure means that market entry strategies require granular country-level planning, local clinical data generation, and collaborations with regional stakeholders to address diagnostic access, patient identification, and distribution logistics. Collectively, these regional characteristics shape prioritization of clinical programs, pricing approaches, and partnership models for sustained adoption.
Company-level strategic intelligence examining innovator portfolios, partnership models, lifecycle tactics, and competitive positioning among PARP inhibitor stakeholders
Competitive dynamics among companies active in the PARP inhibitor ecosystem reflect a combination of portfolio depth, clinical differentiation, and strategic partnerships. Innovator organizations have focused on extending indications through label expansion studies, pursuing combination trials to broaden utility, and investing in companion diagnostics to enhance precision in patient selection. These tactics are accompanied by lifecycle management programs that include new formulation development, new dosing paradigms, and safety optimization to preserve clinical relevance as competitors enter adjacent indications.
Partnership models and licensing arrangements remain central to accelerating development and optimizing geographic reach; alliances with diagnostic developers, biotechnology firms offering synergistic targeted agents, and regional commercialization partners enable more efficient execution. In parallel, companies are intensifying real-world evidence initiatives to support payer discussions and to validate long-term outcomes outside clinical trial populations. Stakeholders that combine scientific leadership with pragmatic commercial and access planning will be better positioned to navigate regulatory complexity and evolving treatment standards.
Actionable strategic recommendations for industry leaders to optimize PARP inhibitor development, commercialization, and patient access in a shifting healthcare landscape
Industry leaders should adopt a proactive, integrated strategy that aligns clinical development with access planning, diagnostic enablement, and supply-chain resiliency. First, prioritize biomarker-driven patient identification by investing in companion diagnostics and in collaborative initiatives to increase testing penetration across clinical settings; this reduces uncertainty in payer negotiations and accelerates appropriate patient uptake. Second, design clinical programs that generate comparative effectiveness and real-world outcomes in parallel with regulatory submissions, because evidence breadth strengthens coverage discussions and supports differentiated positioning in crowded therapeutic classes.
Operationally, diversify manufacturing and sourcing footprints to mitigate tariff and logistics disruptions while exploring value-based contracting and risk-sharing arrangements with payers to align treatment incentives with outcomes. Commercial teams should tailor market access strategies to regional reimbursement environments and end-user channels, establishing early dialogues with health technology assessment bodies and payers. Finally, pursue targeted partnerships that address diagnostic scale-up, combination regimen development, and local market entry needs; coordinated cross-functional execution across R&D, medical affairs, market access, and commercial operations will be essential to translate therapeutic potential into sustainable patient impact.
Robust research methodology detailing data sources, primary and secondary research, validation processes, and quality controls for credible PARP inhibitor insights
The research approach underpinning this analysis relied on a rigorous, multi-source methodology combining primary and secondary evidence, expert validation, and iterative triangulation to ensure credible and actionable findings. Secondary research encompassed peer-reviewed literature, regulatory documents, clinical trial registries, and published guidance from regulatory and reimbursement authorities to build a foundational understanding of indications, mechanisms, and approval pathways. This desk-based phase was complemented by targeted primary research including structured interviews with clinical experts, payers, and commercial leaders to surface contextual insights on adoption barriers and operational challenges.
Data synthesis involved cross-referencing clinical endpoints with regulatory labels and diagnostic strategies, and validating emerging themes through advisory consultations. Quality controls included source traceability, bias assessment of expert inputs, and sensitivity analyses around alternative interpretation of clinical and policy signals. Where data gaps existed, assumptions were explicitly documented and triangulated against multiple sources. Ethical and compliance considerations guided stakeholder engagement and the anonymization of interview contributions, ensuring that insights are both robust and responsibly derived.
Concluding synthesis on the trajectory of PARP inhibitor therapy integrating scientific advances, market forces, and policy considerations for informed decision-making
In conclusion, PARP inhibitor therapy stands at an inflection point where biological insight, diagnostic capability, and adaptive development strategies converge to expand clinical utility across multiple tumor types. The therapeutic rationale rooted in DNA repair vulnerability has matured into a pragmatic clinical paradigm supported by targeted patient selection, combination approaches, and maintenance treatment concepts. As regulatory frameworks and payer expectations evolve, success will depend less on a single clinical outcome and more on the breadth and relevance of evidence demonstrating sustained patient benefit across diverse care settings.
Going forward, stakeholders that integrate robust diagnostic strategies, real-world evidence generation, and flexible commercial models will be best positioned to translate scientific advances into meaningful patient outcomes. Operational resilience in manufacturing and supply chains, informed by scenario planning around trade and policy shifts, will further safeguard access. Taken together, these strategic priorities create a pathway for durable clinical impact and responsible stewardship of therapeutic innovation in oncology.
Note: PDF & Excel + Online Access - 1 Year
Comprehensive introduction to PARP inhibitor therapy highlighting mechanism, clinical relevance across tumor types, and evolving role in precision oncology
PARP inhibitors represent a class of targeted therapies that exploit defects in DNA damage repair pathways to selectively impair tumor cell survival, offering a therapeutic avenue that complements standard cytotoxic and immuno-oncology approaches. Since their clinical introduction, these agents have proven particularly relevant in tumors characterized by homologous recombination deficiencies and BRCA mutations, extending their clinical relevance beyond a single histology and into a multi-indication oncology strategy that spans breast, ovarian, pancreatic, and prostate cancers.
This introduction frames the contemporary clinical and commercial context for PARP inhibitor therapy by emphasizing mechanism-driven patient selection, the expansion of companion diagnostics, and the increasing interplay between monotherapy and combination regimens. It also sets the stage for deeper analysis of regulatory pathways, clinical evidence generation, and operational considerations that influence development and access. As precision medicine continues to evolve, stakeholders must reconcile scientific opportunity with pragmatic constraints across manufacturing, reimbursement, and real-world evidence collection to translate biological rationale into sustainable patient benefit.
Transformative shifts redefining PARP inhibitor clinical pathways through biomarker stratification, combination regimens, and diagnostic-enabled treatment decisions
The landscape for PARP inhibitors has shifted from a niche targeted therapy to a multifaceted platform shaped by biomarker-driven approvals, broadened indication sets, and intensified combination strategies with agents such as immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted kinase inhibitors. These transformative shifts are driven by a deeper understanding of DNA repair biology, which has catalyzed regulatory flexibility for biomarker-enriched populations and accelerated the adoption of companion diagnostics that stratify responders more accurately.
Concurrently, clinical development pathways have diversified: maintenance settings and earlier-stage disease interventions are being actively explored alongside traditional treatment lines, while adaptive trial designs and seamless phase transitions are enabling more efficient evidence generation. Commercial models have adapted in parallel, with payers increasingly requiring real-world outcome data and value-based contracting to manage high-cost specialty therapies. Taken together, these dynamics illustrate how scientific advances, regulatory innovation, and payer expectations are converging to redefine how PARP inhibitors are developed, evaluated, and delivered to patients.
Assessing the cumulative effects of United States tariffs in 2025 on PARP inhibitor supply chains, manufacturing economics, and global access dynamics
The cumulative effects of tariff adjustments implemented in the United States in 2025 have introduced a set of operational and strategic headwinds for stakeholders involved in the development, manufacture, and distribution of PARP inhibitors. Increased import duties on active pharmaceutical ingredients, specialized reagents, and medical devices can elevate upstream production costs, prompting manufacturers to reassess supply chain architectures and vendor diversification strategies. In response, many organizations are accelerating nearshoring initiatives and building redundancy into procurement channels to mitigate exposure to tariff volatility and to preserve production continuity.
Beyond direct cost implications, tariff-driven shifts can influence the timing and geography of clinical trial supply logistics, particularly for multinational studies that require cold-chain transport and just-in-time manufacturing. Payers and procurement departments may seek contract renegotiations or impose stricter formulary controls to offset higher acquisition costs, which in turn affects pricing negotiations and access pathways. To navigate this environment, manufacturers and health systems are increasingly prioritizing scenario planning, cost-to-serve analyses, and collaborative contracting frameworks that spread risk and align incentives across the value chain.
Key segmentation insights synthesizing indication-specific, drug-level, therapy-line, care-setting, end-user, distribution, therapy-type, and age-group perspectives
A nuanced segmentation framework is essential to translate heterogeneous clinical evidence into actionable commercial and clinical strategies. When segmenting by indication, consideration must be given to Breast Cancer, Ovarian Cancer, Pancreatic Cancer, and Prostate Cancer, with breast cancer further refined by receptor type into hormone receptor positive and triple negative subgroups and ovarian cancer further characterized by biomarker status including BRCA mutated, HRD, and non-HRD populations; pancreatic cancer segmentation must reflect stage with advanced and early stage cohorts, while prostate cancer should be parsed by metastatic and non-metastatic stages. In addition to indication-level granularity, drug-level segmentation across niraparib, olaparib, rucaparib, and talazoparib highlights differences in label scope, safety profiles, and combination potential.
Line of therapy segmentation across first line, maintenance, and subsequent line frames clinical positioning and evidentiary needs, while treatment setting differentiation between inpatient and outpatient environments informs resource utilization and administration logistics. End-user segmentation encompassing hospitals, retail pharmacies, and specialty clinics determines distribution relationships and commercial engagement models, and distribution channel distinctions among hospital pharmacies, online pharmacies, and retail pharmacies affect accessibility and supply-chain design. Finally, therapy type segmentation between combination therapy and monotherapy and patient age group segmentation of adults and elderly guide trial design, safety monitoring, and adherence strategies. Together, these layers create a multidimensional view that supports targeted clinical development, reimbursement strategies, and commercial execution.
Regional dynamics and strategic differentiators across Americas, Europe Middle East & Africa, and Asia-Pacific shaping access, regulation, and clinical adoption of PARP therapies
Regional dynamics exert a strong influence on regulatory pathways, reimbursement decisions, and clinical adoption for PARP inhibitors across three macro geographies: Americas, Europe, Middle East & Africa, and Asia-Pacific. In the Americas, regulatory agencies and payers tend to emphasize robust clinical trial evidence and real-world effectiveness, while also supporting accelerated pathways for biomarker-driven therapies; commercial strategies must therefore balance evidence generation with payer engagement and patient access programs.
Across Europe, Middle East & Africa, national health technology assessment bodies and varied reimbursement frameworks necessitate tailored value demonstration and portfolio planning, with some markets prioritizing cost-effectiveness assessments and others relying on negotiated access agreements. In the Asia-Pacific region, heterogeneity in regulatory maturity and healthcare infrastructure means that market entry strategies require granular country-level planning, local clinical data generation, and collaborations with regional stakeholders to address diagnostic access, patient identification, and distribution logistics. Collectively, these regional characteristics shape prioritization of clinical programs, pricing approaches, and partnership models for sustained adoption.
Company-level strategic intelligence examining innovator portfolios, partnership models, lifecycle tactics, and competitive positioning among PARP inhibitor stakeholders
Competitive dynamics among companies active in the PARP inhibitor ecosystem reflect a combination of portfolio depth, clinical differentiation, and strategic partnerships. Innovator organizations have focused on extending indications through label expansion studies, pursuing combination trials to broaden utility, and investing in companion diagnostics to enhance precision in patient selection. These tactics are accompanied by lifecycle management programs that include new formulation development, new dosing paradigms, and safety optimization to preserve clinical relevance as competitors enter adjacent indications.
Partnership models and licensing arrangements remain central to accelerating development and optimizing geographic reach; alliances with diagnostic developers, biotechnology firms offering synergistic targeted agents, and regional commercialization partners enable more efficient execution. In parallel, companies are intensifying real-world evidence initiatives to support payer discussions and to validate long-term outcomes outside clinical trial populations. Stakeholders that combine scientific leadership with pragmatic commercial and access planning will be better positioned to navigate regulatory complexity and evolving treatment standards.
Actionable strategic recommendations for industry leaders to optimize PARP inhibitor development, commercialization, and patient access in a shifting healthcare landscape
Industry leaders should adopt a proactive, integrated strategy that aligns clinical development with access planning, diagnostic enablement, and supply-chain resiliency. First, prioritize biomarker-driven patient identification by investing in companion diagnostics and in collaborative initiatives to increase testing penetration across clinical settings; this reduces uncertainty in payer negotiations and accelerates appropriate patient uptake. Second, design clinical programs that generate comparative effectiveness and real-world outcomes in parallel with regulatory submissions, because evidence breadth strengthens coverage discussions and supports differentiated positioning in crowded therapeutic classes.
Operationally, diversify manufacturing and sourcing footprints to mitigate tariff and logistics disruptions while exploring value-based contracting and risk-sharing arrangements with payers to align treatment incentives with outcomes. Commercial teams should tailor market access strategies to regional reimbursement environments and end-user channels, establishing early dialogues with health technology assessment bodies and payers. Finally, pursue targeted partnerships that address diagnostic scale-up, combination regimen development, and local market entry needs; coordinated cross-functional execution across R&D, medical affairs, market access, and commercial operations will be essential to translate therapeutic potential into sustainable patient impact.
Robust research methodology detailing data sources, primary and secondary research, validation processes, and quality controls for credible PARP inhibitor insights
The research approach underpinning this analysis relied on a rigorous, multi-source methodology combining primary and secondary evidence, expert validation, and iterative triangulation to ensure credible and actionable findings. Secondary research encompassed peer-reviewed literature, regulatory documents, clinical trial registries, and published guidance from regulatory and reimbursement authorities to build a foundational understanding of indications, mechanisms, and approval pathways. This desk-based phase was complemented by targeted primary research including structured interviews with clinical experts, payers, and commercial leaders to surface contextual insights on adoption barriers and operational challenges.
Data synthesis involved cross-referencing clinical endpoints with regulatory labels and diagnostic strategies, and validating emerging themes through advisory consultations. Quality controls included source traceability, bias assessment of expert inputs, and sensitivity analyses around alternative interpretation of clinical and policy signals. Where data gaps existed, assumptions were explicitly documented and triangulated against multiple sources. Ethical and compliance considerations guided stakeholder engagement and the anonymization of interview contributions, ensuring that insights are both robust and responsibly derived.
Concluding synthesis on the trajectory of PARP inhibitor therapy integrating scientific advances, market forces, and policy considerations for informed decision-making
In conclusion, PARP inhibitor therapy stands at an inflection point where biological insight, diagnostic capability, and adaptive development strategies converge to expand clinical utility across multiple tumor types. The therapeutic rationale rooted in DNA repair vulnerability has matured into a pragmatic clinical paradigm supported by targeted patient selection, combination approaches, and maintenance treatment concepts. As regulatory frameworks and payer expectations evolve, success will depend less on a single clinical outcome and more on the breadth and relevance of evidence demonstrating sustained patient benefit across diverse care settings.
Going forward, stakeholders that integrate robust diagnostic strategies, real-world evidence generation, and flexible commercial models will be best positioned to translate scientific advances into meaningful patient outcomes. Operational resilience in manufacturing and supply chains, informed by scenario planning around trade and policy shifts, will further safeguard access. Taken together, these strategic priorities create a pathway for durable clinical impact and responsible stewardship of therapeutic innovation in oncology.
Note: PDF & Excel + Online Access - 1 Year
Table of Contents
181 Pages
- 1. Preface
- 1.1. Objectives of the Study
- 1.2. Market Segmentation & Coverage
- 1.3. Years Considered for the Study
- 1.4. Currency
- 1.5. Language
- 1.6. Stakeholders
- 2. Research Methodology
- 3. Executive Summary
- 4. Market Overview
- 5. Market Insights
- 5.1. Clinical uptake of next generation oral PARP inhibitors with improved safety and tolerability profiles
- 5.2. Breakthrough regulatory approvals of PARP inhibitors for non-BRCA mutant indications expanding patient access
- 5.3. Strategic partnerships driving development of PARP inhibitor antibody drug conjugates for enhanced tumor targeting
- 5.4. Identification of novel predictive biomarkers to optimize PARP inhibitor patient selection and therapeutic outcomes
- 5.5. Emerging mechanisms of resistance to PARP inhibitors spurring innovation in second line combination strategies
- 5.6. Real world evidence highlighting long term cost effectiveness and quality of life benefits of maintenance PARP inhibitor use in ovarian cancer
- 5.7. Pipeline development of long acting injectable PARP inhibitors aimed at improving adherence and reducing dosing frequency
- 5.8. Expansion of PARP inhibitor use into earlier treatment lines and maintenance settings across solid tumors to improve progression free survival
- 5.9. Growing clinical focus on PARP inhibitor combinations with immune checkpoint inhibitors to deepen responses in platinum sensitive and platinum resistant disease
- 5.10. Commercial prioritization of tumor agnostic PARP inhibitor development strategies targeting DNA damage repair pathway signatures rather than single gene mutations
- 6. Cumulative Impact of United States Tariffs 2025
- 7. Cumulative Impact of Artificial Intelligence 2025
- 8. PARP Inhibitors Drug Therapy Market, by Drug
- 8.1. Niraparib
- 8.2. Olaparib
- 8.3. Rucaparib
- 8.4. Talazoparib
- 9. PARP Inhibitors Drug Therapy Market, by Indication
- 9.1. Breast Cancer
- 9.2. Ovarian Cancer
- 9.3. Pancreatic Cancer
- 9.4. Prostate Cancer
- 10. PARP Inhibitors Drug Therapy Market, by Line Of Therapy
- 10.1. First Line
- 10.2. Maintenance
- 10.3. Subsequent Line
- 11. PARP Inhibitors Drug Therapy Market, by Treatment Setting
- 11.1. Inpatient
- 11.2. Outpatient
- 12. PARP Inhibitors Drug Therapy Market, by Therapy Type
- 12.1. Combination Therapy
- 12.2. Monotherapy
- 13. PARP Inhibitors Drug Therapy Market, by Patient Age Group
- 13.1. Adults
- 13.2. Elderly
- 14. PARP Inhibitors Drug Therapy Market, by End User
- 14.1. Hospitals
- 14.2. Retail Pharmacies
- 14.3. Specialty Clinics
- 15. PARP Inhibitors Drug Therapy Market, by Distribution Channel
- 15.1. Hospital Pharmacies
- 15.2. Online Pharmacies
- 15.3. Retail Pharmacies
- 16. PARP Inhibitors Drug Therapy Market, by Region
- 16.1. Americas
- 16.1.1. North America
- 16.1.2. Latin America
- 16.2. Europe, Middle East & Africa
- 16.2.1. Europe
- 16.2.2. Middle East
- 16.2.3. Africa
- 16.3. Asia-Pacific
- 17. PARP Inhibitors Drug Therapy Market, by Group
- 17.1. ASEAN
- 17.2. GCC
- 17.3. European Union
- 17.4. BRICS
- 17.5. G7
- 17.6. NATO
- 18. PARP Inhibitors Drug Therapy Market, by Country
- 18.1. United States
- 18.2. Canada
- 18.3. Mexico
- 18.4. Brazil
- 18.5. United Kingdom
- 18.6. Germany
- 18.7. France
- 18.8. Russia
- 18.9. Italy
- 18.10. Spain
- 18.11. China
- 18.12. India
- 18.13. Japan
- 18.14. Australia
- 18.15. South Korea
- 19. Competitive Landscape
- 19.1. Market Share Analysis, 2024
- 19.2. FPNV Positioning Matrix, 2024
- 19.3. Competitive Analysis
- 19.3.1. AstraZeneca plc
- 19.3.2. GlaxoSmithKline plc
- 19.3.3. Clovis Oncology, Inc.
- 19.3.4. Pfizer Inc.
- 19.3.5. Merck & Co., Inc.
- 19.3.6. Zai Lab Limited
- 19.3.7. Jiangsu Hengrui Pharmaceuticals Co., Ltd.
- 19.3.8. BeiGene, Ltd.
- 19.3.9. IMPACT Therapeutics
- 19.3.10. Johnson & Johnson Services, Inc.
- 19.3.11. AbbVie Inc.
- 19.3.12. Bristol-Myers Squibb Company
- 19.3.13. Merck KGaA
- 19.3.14. F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.
- 19.3.15. Novartis AG
- 19.3.16. Bayer AG
- 19.3.17. Sanofi S.A.
- 19.3.18. Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited
- 19.3.19. Daiichi Sankyo Company, Limited
- 19.3.20. Eisai Co., Ltd.
- 19.3.21. Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd.
- 19.3.22. Astellas Pharma Inc.
- 19.3.23. Eli Lilly and Company
- 19.3.24. Amgen Inc.
- 19.3.25. Biogen Inc.
- 19.3.26. ONO PHARMACEUTICAL CO., LTD.
- 19.3.27. Kyowa Kirin Co., Ltd.
- 19.3.28. JEIL PHARMACEUTICAL CO., LTD.
- 19.3.29. Genentech, Inc.
- 19.3.30. Artios Pharma Ltd.
- 19.3.31. Repare Therapeutics Inc.
- 19.3.32. Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc.
- 19.3.33. Checkpoint Therapeutics, Inc.
- 19.3.34. Ribon Therapeutics, Inc.
- 19.3.35. Guardian Therapeutics Inc.
- 19.3.36. SyntheX Inc.
- 19.3.37. Myriad Genetics, Inc.
- 19.3.38. Olympus Corporation
Pricing
Currency Rates
Questions or Comments?
Our team has the ability to search within reports to verify it suits your needs. We can also help maximize your budget by finding sections of reports you can purchase.
