Literature DB >> 14577717

Defining and characterizing the late-stage biopharmaceutical pipeline.

Paul C Nagle1, Timothy F Lugo, Christopher A Nicita.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To identify and describe biopharmaceuticals in late-stage development in the United States and to understand their implications for third-party payers. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: "Biopharmaceutical" and biopharmaceuticals in late-stage US development (had completed Phase 2 or higher) were identified through reviews of literature, 4 drug-development databases, a clinical trial database, and informal telephone conversations with representatives of the US Food and Drug Administration, faculty at academic institutions, and manufacturers.
RESULTS: "Biopharmaceutical" was defined as "any biology-based therapeutic that structurally mimics compounds found within the body." This includes recombinant proteins, monoclonal and polyclonal antibodies, peptides, antisense oligonucleotides, therapeutic genes, and certain therapeutic vaccines. As of April 2003, there were 102 unique biopharmaceuticals in late-stage development for 156 indications in 36 disease categories, affecting at least 22 distinct physician specialties. Cancer agents are most common, with 30 agents (29%) targeting 62 indications (40%). Nearly 90% of the biopharmaceuticals require administration via injection or infusion, nearly 70% will require administration by a healthcare provider, and more than 60% will be administered in ambulatory care settings. All 22 physician specialties are affected by healthcare provider-administered biopharmaceuticals. Excluding cancer-related biopharmaceuticals, 60% of biopharmaceuticals and 54% of indications require chronic administration. Up to 81 biopharmaceuticals for 123 indications may be approved within the next 4 years (including secondary approvals).
CONCLUSIONS: The broad range of the late-stage US biopharmaceutical pipeline has significant implications for third-party payers due to their likely premium price, once approved, as well as novel logistical considerations. Payers must prepare for a wide range of clinical, administrative, delivery, and economic issues.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14577717

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Manag Care        ISSN: 1088-0224            Impact factor:   2.229


  7 in total

1.  Opportunity, resources, and affordability: multistakeholder perspectives.

Authors:  Janice L Clarke; Alexis Skoufalos; David B Nash; Eric Toppy
Journal:  Biotechnol Healthc       Date:  2009-04

Review 2.  Biological therapy and dentistry: a review paper.

Authors:  Lida Radfar; Roshanak E Ahmadabadi; Farah Masood; R Hal Scofield
Journal:  Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol       Date:  2015-07-31

Review 3.  Economic evaluation in the US: what is the missing link?

Authors:  Peter J Neumann; Sean D Sullivan
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  I.m.I.d. Spurs innovations, tough payer questions.

Authors:  Jill Marquardt
Journal:  Biotechnol Healthc       Date:  2006-02

Review 5.  Modeling, simulation, and translation framework for the preclinical development of monoclonal antibodies.

Authors:  Kenneth T Luu; Eugenia Kraynov; Bing Kuang; Paolo Vicini; Wei-Zhu Zhong
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2013-02-14       Impact factor: 4.009

6.  N-of-1 trials of expensive biological therapies: a third way?

Authors:  Richard L Kravitz; Naihua Duan; Richard H White
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2008-05-26

7.  Biosimilar medicines and cost-effectiveness.

Authors:  Steven Simoens
Journal:  Clinicoecon Outcomes Res       Date:  2011-02-10
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.