|
Table of Contents |
|
Commercial Insight: HIV in the USA - Increasing Choice, Flexibility and Competition - Focus on commercial aspects of HIV treatments market in the US with predictive insights to 2011
Product Code: dmhc1894
Publication Date: 13-Jun-2003
Overview
Introduction
With a focus on the commercial environment within the HIV sector in the USA, this Analysis investigates key market characteristics and the strategies required to improve market conditions. Analysis of company portfolio strategies and product positioning provides the reader with knowledge of how company strategies result in varying levels of commercial returns.
Scope
· Detailed case studies featuring company portfolio, product development and launch strategies
· US sales data for the top 10 HIV products along with forecasts to 2011 for the top 10 selling HIV drugs and classes
· SWOT analyses of key HIV drugs are provided, along with 12-month event screens - providing detailed knowledge of events specific to each product
Report Highlights
Despite a predicted slow down in overall growth and key obstacles with regard to efficacy, diagnosis, resistance and compliance, Datamonitor predicts that the US HIV market will more than double by 2011 providing an additional $4.2 bn in revenue.
The approval of Roche’s novel fusion inhibitor Fuzeon will change treatment strategies for late stage patients. The key barrier to use is its delivery method (subcutaneous) and high price.
With the launch of BMS’ Reyataz and BI’s tipranavir, the PI drug class will be as large as the NRTI drug class in terms of number of therapeutics. This will shift the usage of HAART towards NRTI-sparing regimens.
Reasons to Purchase
· Understand the relationship between company product positioning strategies and HIV market characteristics
· Gain insight to HIV portfolio strategies and factors that drive successful drug development and launch
Table of Contents
|
CHAPTER 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY |
3 |
|
Scope of the analysis |
3 |
|
Datamonitor insight into the US HIV market |
3 |
|
Despite predicted slow down in overall growth and key obstacles with regard to efficacy, diagnosis, resistance and compliance, Datamonitor predicts that the US HIV market will more than double by 2011 providing an additional $4.2 billion in revenue. During this timeframe, an influx of new products and competitors will fragment the current market challenging the dominant oligopoly. |
4 |
|
The NRTI class will continue to dominate the HIV treatments market through its inclusion as a ‘backbone’ to global treatment regimens. Most inter-class competition will occur between NNRTI and PI based products. Their penetration as adjuncts or alternatives to existing NRTI backbones will depend on official recommendation, superior efficacy and improved resistance profile. |
5 |
|
The HIV treatments market currently is more driven by product life-cycle management than ‘radical’ new product development. Datamonitor believes that enhanced dosing as a source of product differentiation will be effective in the short term, but will soon become commonplace. A focus on portfolio balance, minimizing exposure to NRTI patent expiry and shifting treatment regimes will be key to success. |
6 |
|
Datamonitor believes the search for commercial value in the HIV treatments market will become increasingly complex. Product development should focus on targeting wider patient groups, taking into context commitments to corporate social responsibility, brand awareness and improved capture/diagnosis. Larger players should remain vigilant with regard to smaller, more agile competitors. |
7 |
|
Summary |
8 |
|
Key metrics |
8 |
|
Key market events during 2002/2003 |
10 |
|
AIDS Healthcare Foundation Sues GSK |
10 |
|
VaxGen’s AIDSVAX Shows Disappointing Endpoints |
10 |
|
Gilead Acquires Triangle Pharmaceuticals |
10 |
|
Fuzeon Receives FDA Approval |
10 |
|
CHAPTER 2 MARKET SEGMENTATION & DEFINITION |
12 |
|
2.1 Strategic scoping and focus |
13 |
|
2.2 Market definition |
15 |
|
Nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors |
15 |
|
Non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors |
16 |
|
Protease inhibitors |
18 |
|
Entry inhibitors/fusion inhibitors |
19 |
|
2.3 Definition of gold-standard drugs/classes |
20 |
|
2.4 Associated pharmaceutical markets |
21 |
|
CHAPTER 3 US MARKET ANALYSIS |
22 |
|
3.1 US market analysis |
23 |
|
Forecast scenario analysis |
24 |
|
3.2 NRTI analysis |
26 |
|
3.3 NRTI brand analysis |
27 |
|
Combivir analysis |
27 |
|
Epivir analysis |
30 |
|
Trizivir analysis |
32 |
|
Viread analysis |
34 |
|
Zerit analysis |
37 |
|
Ziagen analysis |
40 |
|
Other drugs in the NRTI class |
42 |
|
R&D drugs in the NRTI drug class |
43 |
|
3.4 NNRTI brand analysis |
44 |
|
Sustiva analysis |
44 |
|
Viramune analysis |
47 |
|
Rescriptor analysis |
50 |
|
R&D drugs in the NNRTI drug class |
51 |
|
3.5 PI brand analysis |
51 |
|
Kaletra analysis |
51 |
|
Viracept analysis |
55 |
|
Other drugs in the PI class |
57 |
|
R&D drugs in the PI drug class |
58 |
|
3.6 Fusion inhibitor brand analysis |
59 |
|
Fuzeon analysis |
59 |
|
R&D drugs in the FI drug class |
61 |
|
CHAPTER 4 LIFE-CYCLE AND PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT |
62 |
|
4.1 Strategic portfolio analysis |
63 |
|
Introduction |
63 |
|
Global pharmaceutical performance for key HIV market players |
63 |
|
US pharmaceutical and HIV portfolio performance |
84 |
|
Therapy area attractiveness matrix |
88 |
|
Portfolio gap analysis |
93 |
|
4.2 Life-cycle management overview |
95 |
|
GSK’s Retrovir lifecycle characteristics |
95 |
|
Life-cycle comparisons to GSK’s other HIV drugs |
98 |
|
4.3 Launch strategy/market penetration analysis |
100 |
|
Kaletra development and launch strategy: lessons from Norvir |
100 |
|
Benchmarks and case studies |
105 |
|
4.4 Optimizing peak sales |
108 |
|
Benchmarks and case studies |
110 |
|
4.5 Revenue protection strategies |
114 |
|
Generic penetration analysis across classes |
114 |
|
CHAPTER 5 STRATEGIC PRODUCT POSITIONING |
119 |
|
5.1 Pricing and reimbursement |
120 |
|
Health economic considerations |
120 |
|
Pricing data for key products in the US |
124 |
|
Patient cost analysis by line of therapy |
127 |
|
Case studies |
131 |
|
Role of patient advocacy |
133 |
|
What do companies need to do to justify setting high price points? |
135 |
|
Physician focused product positioning |
136 |
|
Specialists in HIV Medicine |
137 |
|
Physician targeting strategies |
139 |
|
5.2 Patient targeting and influence |
144 |
|
Patient sub-group positioning analysis |
144 |
|
Brand eImaging |
146 |
|
Patient advocacy and community initiatives |
148 |
|
US HIV market data |
150 |
|
Forecasting methodology |
152 |
|
List of tables |
153 |
|
List of figures |
153 |
|
Bibliography |
153 |
|
About Datamonitor |
154 |
|
About Datamonitor Healthcare |
154 |
|
Datamonitor Healthcare’s research and analysis methodologies |
155 |
|
Datamonitor Healthcare’s therapy area capabilities |
155 |
|
About Disease analysis team |
156 |
|
Datamonitor Healthcare’s Consulting expertise |
156 |
|
Datamonitor’s Therapeutic Consulting expertise |
157 |
|
Key therapy team members |
158 |
|
Simon Hemsworth, Director of Therapy Area Analysis |
158 |
|
John Savopoulos, Lead analyst, Infectious Diseases |
159 |
|
David Abramson, Therapeutic Lead Consultant |
160 |
|
Dheeraj Khiytani, Senior Infectious Diseases Analyst |
160 |
|
Disclaimer |
161 |
|
List of Tables |
|
|
Table 1: Key parameters of the US HIV market to 2011 |
9 |
|
Table 2: US forecasts of key currently marketed products in HIV, 2003–11 |
9 |
|
Figure 2: Timeline: the development of HIV therapy, 1987–2003 |
15 |
|
Table 3: Gold standard comparison by indication and class, 2003 |
21 |
|
Table 4: US HIV drug sales ($m), 2001–11 |
23 |
|
Figure 3: Top 10 drug contribution to market growth, 2001–11 |
24 |
|
Figure 4: Key NRTI contribution to US market growth, 2001–11 |
26 |
|
Table 5: Combivir: key facts |
27 |
|
Table 6: US Combivir sales forecasts, 2003–11 |
29 |
|
Table 7: Epivir: key facts |
30 |
|
Table 8: US Epivir sales forecasts, 2003–11 |
31 |
|
Table 9: Trizivir: key facts |
32 |
|
Table 10: US Trizivir sales forecasts, 2003–11 |
33 |
|
Table 11: Viread: key facts |
34 |
|
Table 12: US Viread sales forecasts, 2003–11 |
37 |
|
Table 13: Zerit: key facts |
37 |
|
Table 14: US Zerit sales forecasts, 2003–11 |
39 |
|
Table 15: Ziagen: key facts |
40 |
|
Table 16: US Ziagen sales forecasts, 2003–11 |
42 |
|
Table 17: Other NRTI drugs: key facts |
42 |
|
Table 18: R&D included in NRTI forecast, 2003–11 |
43 |
|
Table 19: Sustiva: key facts |
44 |
|
Table 20: US Sustiva sales forecasts, 2003–11 |
47 |
|
Table 21: Viramune: key facts |
47 |
|
Table 22: US Viramune sales forecasts, 2003–11 |
50 |
|
Table 23: Rescriptor: key facts |
50 |
|
Table 24: R&D included in NNRTI forecast, 2003–11 |
51 |
|
Table 25: Kaletra: key facts |
51 |
|
Table 26: US Kaletra sales forecasts, 2003–11 |
54 |
|
Table 27: Viracept: key facts |
55 |
|
Table 28: US Viracept sales forecasts, 2003–11 |
57 |
|
Table 29: Other PI drugs: key facts |
57 |
|
Table 30: R&D drugs included in PI forecast, 2003–11 |
58 |
|
Table 31: Fuzeon: key facts |
59 |
|
Table 32: Analyst estimates of Fuzeon sales ($m), 2003–04 |
61 |
|
Table 33: R&D in FI drug class |
61 |
|
Table 34: Global pharmaceutical sales for HIV drug manufacturers, 2000–02 |
63 |
|
Table 35: Global sales of infectious disease products for HIV drug manufacturers, 2000–02 |
64 |
|
Table 36: Global HIV product sales for HIV drug manufacturers, 2000–02 |
64 |
|
Table 37: Proportion of global pharmaceutical revenues generated by infectious disease franchises and HIV franchises, 2002 |
66 |
|
Table 38: Proportion of infectious disease revenues generated by HIV portfolio, 2002 |
66 |
|
Table 39: Comparison of global pharmaceutical, infectious disease and HIV CAGRs for HIV drug manufacturers, 2000–02 |
68 |
|
Table 40: US pharmaceutical, infectious disease and HIV product sales for HIV drug manufacturers, 2002 |
84 |
|
Table 41: Comparison of sales share of global and US HIV markets for HIV drug manufacturers (%), 2002 |
86 |
|
Table 42: Global HIV market comparison to other infectious disease areas ($m), 2003–10 |
88 |
|
Table 43: Comparison of HIV market leader global revenue dynamics to peer products in other infectious disease areas ($m), 2002 |
90 |
|
Table 44: Criteria for determining therapy attractiveness |
91 |
|
Table 45: HIV market leader portfolio composition, 2002 |
94 |
|
Figure 26: Global sales of Retrovir, 1987–2002 |
96 |
|
Table 46: Annual US prices for currently marketed antiretrovirals, 2003 |
126 |
|
Table 47: Cost comparison for commonly used HIV drug regimens in the US, 2003 |
128 |
|
Figure 46: Viread patient product positioning |
147 |
|
Table 48: US sales data for the top 10 selling HIV drugs by quarter ($m), 2001–02 |
150 |
|
Table 49: Forecast US sales for the top selling NRTIs ($m), 2001–11 |
151 |
|
Table 50: Forecast US sales for the top selling NNRTIs ($m), 2001–11 |
151 |
|
Table 51: Forecast US sales for the top selling PIs ($m), 2001–11 |
152 |
|
List of Figures |
|
|
Figure 1: Key NRTI contribution to US market growth, 2001-2011 |
8 |
|
Figure 5: Key factors in the market dynamics of Combivir, 2003 |
29 |
|
Figure 6: Key factors in the market dynamics of Epivir, 2003 |
31 |
|
Figure 7: Key factors in the market dynamics of Trizivir, 2003 |
33 |
|
Figure 8: Key factors in the market dynamics of Viread, 2003 |
36 |
|
Figure 9: Key factors in the market dynamics of Zerit, 2003 |
39 |
|
Figure 10: Key factors in the market dynamics of Ziagen, 2003 |
41 |
|
Figure 11: Key factors in the market dynamics of Sustiva, 2003 |
46 |
|
Figure 12: Key factors in the market dynamics of Viramune, 2003 |
49 |
|
Figure 13: Key factors in the market dynamics of Kaletra, 2003 |
54 |
|
Figure 14: Key factors in the market dynamics of Viracept, 2003 |
56 |
|
Figure 15: Key factors in the market dynamics of Fuzeon, 2003 |
60 |
|
Figure 16: SWOT analysis of GSK’s portfolio strategy, 2003 |
69 |
|
Figure 17: GSK’s therapeutic strategy to 2007 |
72 |
|
Figure 18: SWOT analysis of BMS’s portfolio strategy, 2003 |
74 |
|
Figure 19: BMS’s therapeutic strategy to 2007 |
77 |
|
Figure 20: SWOT analysis of Abbott’s portfolio strategy, 2003 |
79 |
|
Figure 21: Average global company pharmaceutical, infectious disease and HIV product share by market, 2000–02 |
83 |
|
Figure 22: Comparison of US pharmaceutical, infectious disease and HIV sales dominance by rank, 2002 |
85 |
|
Figure 23: Comparison of sales share of the global and US HIV markets by HIV drug manufacturer, 2002 |
87 |
|
Figure 24: Global HIV market comparison to other infectious disease areas ($m), 2003–10 |
89 |
|
Figure 25: Therapeutic attractiveness matrix for selected infectious disease areas, 2003–07 |
92 |
|
Figure 27: Retrovir’s global sales life cycle characteristics, 1987–2002 |
97 |
|
Figure 28: Global sales lifecycle curves for GSK’s antiretrovirals, 1987–2002 |
98 |
|
Figure 29: Kaletra positioning summary, 2001 |
102 |
|
Figure 30: Kaletra pre-launch strategy, 1996–2000 |
103 |
|
Figure 31: Kaletra positioning strategy |
105 |
|
Figure 32: Comparison of US Kaletra and Trizivir sales growth, 2000–02 |
106 |
|
Figure 33: Comparison of US Sustiva and Ziagen sales growth, 2000–02 |
107 |
|
Figure 34: Sales of Kaletra and Viracept following Kaletra launch, 2000–02 |
112 |
|
Figure 35: Viread and Zerit US sales by quarter preceding and following Viread launch, 2000–02 |
113 |
|
Figure 36: Lifecycle of a drug, and the potential effect of reformulation |
118 |
|
Figure 37: Factors affecting company intervention in issues of public interest, 2003 |
123 |
|
Figure 38: Methodology for calculating average annual drug cost |
127 |
|
Figure 39: Comparison of average vs. total cost for key combination regimens used in the US, 2003 |
129 |
|
Figure 40: Comparison of price points charged by GSK and BMS for their HIV portfolios in the US, 2003 |
131 |
|
Figure 41: Comparison of Trizivir and Combivir pricing in the US, 2003 |
132 |
|
Figure 42: AAHIVM segmentation of HIV-treating physicians by specialty, 2003 |
137 |
|
Figure 43: Patient segmentation by treating physicians |
138 |
|
Figure 44: Strategies involved in physician detailing |
141 |
|
Figure 45: Maximizing promotional effectiveness |
145 |
|
Figure 47: Datamonitor’s Healthcare Consultancy |
157 |
|
Figure 48: Datamonitor Healthcare’s Therapeutic Consulting capabilities |
158 |