The Distribution of Sales Revenues from Pharmaceutical Innovation

Abstract

Objective: This report updates our earlier work on the returns to pharmaceutical research and development (R&D) in the US (1980 to 1984), which showed that the returns distributions are highly skewed. It evaluates a more recent cohort of new drug introductions in the US (1988 to 1992) and examines how the returns distribution is emerging for drugs with life cycles concentrated in the 1990s versus the 1980s.Design and setting: Methods were described in detail in our earlier reports. The current sample included 110 new drug entities (including 28 orphan drugs), and sales data were obtained for the period 1988 to 1998, which represented between 7 and 11 years of sales for the drugs included. 20 years was chosen as the expected market life for this cohort, and a 2-step procedure was used to project future sales for the drugs -during the period until patent expiry and then beyond patent expiry until the 20-year time-horizon was completed. Thus, the values in the first half of the life cycle are essentially based on realised sales, while those in the second half are projected using information on patent expiry and other inputs. Main outcome measures and results:Peak annual sales for the top decile of drugs introduced between 1988 and 1992 in the US amounted to almost $US1.1 billion compared with peak sales of less than $US175 million (1992 values) for the mean compound. In particular, the top decile accounted for 56% of overall sales revenue. Although the sales distributions were skewed in both our earlier and current analysis, the top decile in the later time-period exhibited more rapid rates of growth after launch, a peak that was more than 50% greater in real terms than for the 1980 to 1984 cohort, and a faster rate of expected decline in sales after patent expiry. One factor contributing to the distribution of sales revenues becoming more skewed over time is the orphan drug phenomenon (i.e. most of the orphan drugs are concentrated at the bottom of the distribution). Conclusion:The distribution of sales revenues for new drug compounds is highly skewed in nature. In this regard, the top decile of new drugs accounts for more than half of the total sales generated by the 1988 to 1992 cohort analysed. Furthermore, the distribution of sales revenues for this cohort is more skewed than that of the 1980 to 1984 cohort we analysed in previous research.

The price of innovation: new estimates of drug development costs

“…The much higher R&D cost estimates for this study raise a question about the recent profit experience of the pharmaceutical industry. However, Grabowski and Vernon (2000) found substantial growth in pharmaceutical sales for 1990s drug cohorts. A new study (Grabowski et al, 2002) on pharmaceutical profitability using some of the cost results in this study and recent sales data is qualitatively consistent with the outcomes of the earlier profitability studies (i.e.…”

Economic Evaluation of a Bayesian Model to Predict Late-Phase Success of New Chemical Entities

“…Revenue range for approved NCEs was estimated from 7‐year postapproval cumulative mean ($600 million) and top‐decile ($3095 million) values [19]. The revenue parameter values were randomly sampled from a gamma distribution, with a shape approximating the distribution of the reported return on investment for 18 pharmaceutical companies [19].…”

Patent‐backed securities in pharmaceuticals: what determines success or failure?

“…For this reason, for each drug, we considered its expected residual market life at the time of the deal. We referred to an average expected market life of 20 years, given the shortening of drugs' life cycles and the increasing competitive pressure in pharmaceuticals (Grabowski and Vernon, 2000). Degree of cooperation .…”

“… 12. The sales percentage decline in the first two years after patent expiration for drugs with US$50 million sales or more at the time of patent expiration is estimated to be, on average, 43% and 42%, respectively (Grabowski and Vernon, 2000). …”