Pharmaceutical Sector Inquiry Presentation of the Preliminary Report 28 November 2008
Pharmaceutical Sector Inquiry Presentation of the Preliminary Report Dominik Schnichels and Philipp Gasparon Pharma Task Force 28 November 2008
Background of the Sector Inquiry Opening of the sector inquiry on 15 January 2008 Observations leading to the launch of the inquiry Delayed market entry of generic medicines Less market entry of new originator medicines Sector inquiry investigates underlying causes Focus on company behaviour Importance of the regulatory framework 3
Structure of the presentation Main market features Company practices that can cause delay of generic entry Company practices that can contribute to the decline/delay in innovation Comments on the regulatory framework 4
Main market features The business model of originator companies Conventional Product Life Cycle: Three main phases 1. R&D phase 2. Exclusivity phase 3. Post-exclusivity phase 5
Main market features Originator companies dependency on blockbusters Company Product name (INN) EU27 turnover ( thousand) Global turnover ( thousand) Product share of company turnover (global) Pfizer Lipitor (atorvastatin calcium) 1,917,151 9,252,101 30% GlaxoSmith Kline Seretide/Advair (fluticasone + salmeterol) 1,795,800 5,108,540 18% Johnson & Johnson Risperdal (risperidone) 1,737,023 6,232,653 35% Sanofi-Aventis Clopidogrel (clopidogrel) 1,620,000 2,424,000 9% Hoffmann- La Roche Herceptin (trastuzumab) 1,345,193 2,954,041 13% Nycomed Pantoprazole (pantoprazole) 1,289,069 1,685,000 55% Wyeth Enbrel (etanercept) 1,159,947 1,492,201 13% Johnson & Johnson Eprex (epoetin alfa) 1,109,974 1,637,521 9% Eli Lilly Zyprexa (olanzapine) 1,059,341 3,473,927 27% Novartis Glivec (imatinib) 939,194 2,228,470 13% 6
1st focus Competition between originator companies and generic companies Impact of generic entry Tool-box of originator companies 7
Impact of generic entry Average time to generic entry: 12 months for the whole sample (non-weighted average) 7 months for the whole sample (weighted average) 4 months for the most valuable medicines Considerable variations across Member State Average time to generic entry after loss of exclusivity, by country 16 14 12 10 Months 8 6 4 2 0 AT BE CZ DE DK ES FI FR GR HU IE IT LU NL PT SE UK 8
Impact of generic entry Development of average price with and without generic entry 1.2 1 0.8 Price index 0.6 0.4 0.2 0-36 -33-30 -27-24 -21-18 -15-12 -9-6 -3 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 Months relative to loss of exclusivity Markets with entry Markets without entry (moving average) 9
Impact of generic entry Savings from Generic Entry Actual savings of 14bn with generic entry delayed by 7 months Potential savings of 3bn more if generic entry is immediate 1,2 1 0,8 Potential additional savings if no delays (EUR 3 bn) Savings from Generic Entry (EUR 14bn) Actual Price index 0,6 Aggregate expenditure: EUR 50 bn Aggregate savings: EUR 14 bn Series4 Inmediate Series5 0,4 0,2 Potential additional savings if no delays: EUR 3 bn (approximation; aggregate figures 2000-2007 after loss of exclusivity, evaluated at constant volumes) Aggregate expenditure (EUR 50 bn) Series3 0-36 -33-30 -27-24 -21-18 -15-12 -9-6 -3 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 Months relative to loss of exclusivity (approximation) 10
Tool-box of originator companies Patent strategies Patent disputes and litigation / EPO opposition Settlement agreements Interventions before authorities Life cycle strategies for follow-on products 11
Tool-box of originator companies Patent strategies The Sector Inquiry does not put into question the importance of patent rights and of their efficient enforcement for the pharmaceutical industry. Strategies: aimed at extending the breadth and duration of protection - patent clusters 12
Tool-box of originator companies Patent strategies (Patent clusters) Quotes of originator companies: I suppose we have all had conversations around "how can we block generic manufacturers" [ ]. Don't play games in patenting new salt forms too late, the generics are starting earlier and earlier. Get claims on key intermediates that cover a number of routes [ ] Process patents are not the biggest block but can put generics off if a superior chemistry job is done." Secondary patents will not stop generic competition indefinitely but may delay generics for a number of years, at best protecting the originator s revenue for a period of time. [ ] Inevitably there will be patents covering products on the market that can be, and will be challenged [ ] The strategy today is to try and provide a solid protection for the substance (has a limited time though) and a portfolio protecting different aspects of product providing extended protection both in brea(d)th and time but inevitable less solid and robust. 13
Tool-box of originator companies Patent strategies Patent clusters of up to 1300 patents and patent applications for a blockbuster medicine EU-wide Conventional life cycle patent portfolio Late life cycle patent portfolio Proportion of total number of application filings (pending and granted) 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% Launch of first product Expiry of first patent Proportion of total number of applications filed (pending and granted) 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% Launch of first product Expiry of first patent Expiry of SPC 0% 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Years after first application filing 0% 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Years after first application filing 14
Tool-box of originator companies Patent strategies Development of Patent Application Filings for the top 20 best-selling medicines 800 Cumulative number of application filings (pending and granted) 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 Launch of first product Expiry of first patent / SPC 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Years after first application filing 15
Tool-box of originator companies Patent disputes and litigation 457 patent disputes were initiated in the EU, originator companies started 91% 698 litigation cases were initiated in the EU, originator companies started 54% Disputes in the EU Litigation in the EU 39 Originator companies Generic companies 320 378 Originator companies Generic companies 418 16
Tool-box of originator companies Patent litigation Nearly 700 cases of patent litigation Generic companies won more than 60% of patent litigation cases 17
Tool-box of originator companies Patent litigation Average duration of cases to reach final outcome: 2.8 years Interim injunctions granted in 112 cases: average duration 18 months 18
Tool-box of originator companies Patent Oppositions Final outcomes of opposition before the EPO Generic companies won 75% of opposition cases 75% success ratio for the generic opponent 25% defeat ratio for the generic opponent 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Number of procedures Patent revoked Patent amended Patent upheld 19
Tool-box of originator companies Patent Oppositions Almost 80% of procedures before the EPO took more than 2 years 25% 23% 20% 19% 20% 20% % of total final procedures 15% 10% 8% 5% 2% 5% 3% 0% 0-1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-6 6-7 7-8 8-9 Number of years 0% 20
Tool-box of originator companies Settlement agreements All settlement agreements 108 99 A. No limitation on generic entry B. Limitation on generic entry 54 45 B.I. No value transfer from the originator company B.II. Value transfer from the originator company 21
Tool-box of originator companies Settlement agreements In total, more than 200m were paid from originator companies to generic companies in settlement agreements limiting generic entry. 42000 40000 38000 36000 34000 32000 30000 28000 26000 24000 22000 20000 18000 16000 14000 12000 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 22 Agreement 1 Agreement 2 Agreement 3 Agreement 4 Agreement 5 Agreement 6 Agreement 7 Agreement 8 Agreement 9 Agreement 10 Agreement 11 Agreement 12 Agreement 13 Agreement 14 Agreement 15 Agreement 16 Agreement 17 Agreement 18 Agreement 19 Agreement 20 Agreement 21 Agreement 22 thousand Agreement 23 In total more than 200 million were paid from originator companies to generic companies
Tool-box of originator companies Interventions (regulatory bodies) ORIGINATOR COMPANIES Interventions Interventions Interventions Application by generic companies Marketing authorisation Pricing Reimbursement Originator companies intervene before national regulatory bodies claiming that generic products are not equivalent, less effective, less safe, of inferior quality or protected by patent. Originator companies also launch litigation against decisions of national regulatory bodies. 23
Tool-box of originator companies Interventions (regulatory bodies) Originator companies won only 2% of cases where court upheld claims against decisions of marketing authorisation bodies raising patent infringement and safety issues 19% of cases where court upheld claims against decisions of marketing authorisation bodies regarding data exclusivity Interventions before marketing authorisation bodies delayed generic entry on average by 4 months Quote of originator company: "Interchangeability issues were used in [several countries] to limit generic erosion [ ] Outcome: extra [originator] product sales of USD 61m in 2 years compared to expected generic erosion. [ ]. Delayed market entry of [generic product] due to requirement for more robust efficacy and safety data. Delay of entry of [ ] results in USD 350m extra [ ] sales [ ] 24
Tool-box of originator companies Life cycle strategies for follow-on products Originator companies launched second generation (follow-on) products for 40% of the medicines in our sample. Originator companies made intensive use of marketing and promotion strategies in order to switch patients to the second generation product before generic entry. Development of sales of second generation product vs. sales of first generation product 5000 INN 2 National market sales (in '000s) 4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 1 13 25 37 49 61 73 85 Timeline (in months) 25
Tool-box of originator companies Life cycle strategies for follow-on products Quotes of originator companies: [Our second generation product] represents the most effective initiative to counter generic [versions of the first generation product] [Our second generation product] is a new formulation of [our first generation product], launched initially as a line extension to maintain the growth momentum of the product If [generic products] come together with or prior to [second generation product] the switch rate is dramatically reduced. [ ] Once [generic products] come in it becomes more difficult to get switches from [old originator product]. 26
Tool-box of originator companies Cumulative use of practices against generic companies Number of tools used by originator companies for the top 30 best-selling products INN 1 INN 2 INN 3 INN 4 INN 5 INN 6 INN 7 INN 8 INN 9 INN 10 INN 11 INN 12 INN 13 INN 14 INN 15 INN 16 INN 17 INN 18 INN 19 INN 20 INN 21 INN 22 INN 23 INN 24 INN 25 INN 26 INN 27 INN 28 INN 29 INN 30 0 1 2 3 4 5 Secondary patenting Disputes and contacts Litigation Settlements Interventions 27
2nd focus Competition between originator companies Patent strategies Patent-related exchanges Patent litigation Agreements between originator companies 28
Competition between originator companies Patent strategies: Defensive patenting The sector inquiry does not put into question the importance of patent rights and of their efficient enforcement for the pharmaceutical industry. Defensive patents 29
Competition between originator companies Patent strategies: Defensive patenting Quotes of originator companies: We identify options to obtain or acquire patents for the sole purpose of limiting the freedom of operation of our competitors [ ] Rights covering competitive alternatives are maintained in major markets until risk of competing products appearing is minimal. (emphasis added) Defensive patents ( Limited list patents) serve to protect compounds closely related to [our company s ] candidates or products. They do not cover [our company s] candidates or products. They protect compounds that would be of interest to a direct competitor. 30
Competition between originator companies Potential overlaps and patent-related exchanges In 1100 instances: overlap between products/r&d poles and patents of competing originator companies Requests for licence: 99 requests for license. Nearly 20% of refusals by patent-holder 31
Competition between originator companies Patent litigation 62% 38% Almost 40% of respondent originator companies were involved in patent litigation with another originator company Two thirds of litigations between originator companies were settled, the majority of these settlements contained a licence agreement. litigation reported no litigation reported 32
Competition between originator companies Agreements between originator companies More than 1450 agreements were concluded between originator companies More than 50% of agreements concerned marketing and commercialisation A particularly high number of agreements concerned Italy, Spain, Germany and Portugal Marketing and promotion agreements 29% Other type of agreements 15% Research cooperation 2% Development cooperation 8% Supply and manufacturing agreements 20% Distribution agreements 26% 33
3rd focus Comments on the regulatory framework European patent system Marketing Authorisation Pricing and Reimbursement 34
Comments on the regulatory framework The European patent system Both generic and originator companies support: the creation of a Community patent the creation of a unified and specialised patent judiciary in Europe Support for the Community patent and unified judiciary to be put in the context of: 700 cases of patent litigation in the EU Conflicting judgements reported in 11% of all final cases Total cost of patent litigation estimated to exceed 420m EUR Generic companies (and to some extent originator companies) call upon the EPO to: ensure the high quality of granted patents effectively counter patent strategies that may cause unnecessary delays 35
Comments on the regulatory framework Marketing Authorisation Companies, industry association and agencies reported bottlenecks in the marketing authorisation procedures which can lead to obstacles/delays and administrative burden Some originator companies also call for further international harmonisation of marketing authorisation procedures Pricing and Reimbursement Originator companies complained about delays and uncertainty created by national pricing and reimbursement procedures Generic companies also complain about delays in particular since some Member States have introduced additional requirements to obtain pricing and reimbursement status 36
Next steps Public consultation until 31 January 2009 Final Report expected for spring 2009 Preliminary Report is available at: http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/sectors/pharmaceuticals/inquiry/index.html 37
Pharmaceutical Sector Inquiry Presentation of the Preliminary Report 28 November 2008