Home > Market Research > Drug Delivery > The Drug Delivery Sector: Reformulating Company Strategies for the Future (report)

The dynamics of the drug delivery market are changing, with pharmaceutical companies bringing drug delivery capabilities in-house. This is driving an evolution in the strategies of the leading players. Datamonitor's analysis provides you with the insight needed to align both your technological and partnership strategy with that of the players most likely to succeed in this changing environment.

• Benchmarks leading drug delivery players by 2001 revenues, R&D spend, operating profits and portfolio value
• Examines drug delivery company product development and licensing strategies
• Identifies drivers and resistors of the use of drug delivery technologies, and the factors impacting the future role of drug delivery companies
• Profiles nine drug delivery companies: Alkermes, Aradigm, Enzon, Nektar, Noven, PowderJect, Sepracor, SkyePharma and Weston Medical

Pharmaceutical companies are taking drug delivery technology in-house, particularly the development of oral controlled and sustained release reformulations. This will drive the classic drug delivery company to evolve its business model in order to retain a competitive edge.

In a bid for increased profitability, some players will transition to an integrated pharma model, the value of which is highlighted by Sepracor, whose products were rated by Datamonitor as being the most valuable of the companies profiled.

Companies that do not set up independently will capitalize on the increasing commercialization of biotechnology products, or focus on those niche drug delivery technologies that pharma clients are expected to continue to outsource.

• Benchmark your strategy against key rivals in the drug delivery sector
• Assess the impact of the changing role of big pharma in the drug delivery sector on your business
• Understand the technological capabilities of drug delivery companies, and identify possible development partners

Provides overviews of fast dissolving drug delivery technologies; estradiol transdermal drug delivery; polycaprolactone nanoparticle drug delivery and more! wtgim2

Table of Contents

CHAPTER 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY	3
Datamonitor’s opinion on the current and future drug delivery market	3
The dynamics of the drug delivery market are changing. Pharmaceutical companies are increasingly bringing drug delivery capabilities in-house, and reformulation technologies are being employed at earlier stages of the product lifecycle. Datamonitor’s analysis suggests that the most successful drug delivery companies will be those that respond to this market evolution by becoming more independent, in terms of both product development and marketing	4
The increasing commercialization of biotechnology and gene based products, which are by their nature difficult to administer non-invasively, represents an emerging opportunity for drug delivery companies. Those companies that wish to retain the traditional R&D service based business model are advised to develop and/or acquire macromolecule focused reformulation platforms	6
The potential value of transitioning to an integrated pharma model is highlighted by Sepracor, whose products were rated by Datamonitor as being the most valuable of the companies profiled. In contrast, pure service providers received a much lower rating. SkyePharma, for example, received a low average value rating per product, although its overall portfolio was rated highly due to the volume of products and technologies	8
CHAPTER 2 SEGMENTING THE DRUG DELIVERY MARKET	13
Key findings	13
Market segmentation by company	14
Market segmentation by technology	26
Oral drug delivery	28
Injectable drug delivery	37
Inhalable drug delivery	43
Transdermal drug delivery	47
Single isomer technology	52
Nasal drug delivery	53
Other drug delivery technologies	57
Market segmentation by therapy area	59
CHAPTER 3 DRUG DELIVERY MARKET AND COMPANY DYNAMICS	62
Key findings	62
Evolution of the drug delivery market, 2002-2007	63
Drivers and resistors to the use of reformulation	63
Factors impacting the role of drug delivery companies	66
Strategies for drug delivery company success	68
CHAPTER 4 ALKERMES	79
Key Findings	79
Current positioning: revenue breakdown in 2001	80
Strategic outlook	81
Company Strategy	82
Introduction to Alkermes	82
Assessment of strategic position	82
Alliance network	85
Portfolio and pipeline analysis	87
Technology focus	87
Injectable sustained release technology	90
Inhalable technology	96
Intra-cerebral technology	99
Corporate Development	101
Profitability, 1997-2001	101
Liquidity, 1997-2001	103
2001 Performance benchmarking	105
Key events shaping corporate activity, 1997-2001	106
CHAPTER 5 ARADIGM	109
Key Findings	109
Current positioning: revenue breakdown in 2001	110
Strategic outlook	111
Company Strategy	112
Introduction to Aradigm	112
Assessment of strategic position	112
Alliance network	116
Portfolio and pipeline analysis	118
Technology focus	118
Inhalable technology	121
Profitability, 1997-2001	138
Liquidity, 1997-2001	141
2001 Performance benchmarking	143
Key events shaping the corporate activity 1997-2001	144
CHAPTER 6 ENZON	147
Key findings	147
Current positioning: revenue breakdown in FY2001	148
Ethical revenue performance: FY2002–FY07	149
Strategic outlook	150
Company strategy	151
Introduction to Enzon	151
Assessment of strategic position	151
Alliance network	153
Portfolio and pipeline analysis	154
Corporate revenue stream, FY1999—FY2001	154
Ethical revenue stream, FY2000–FY01	155
Ethical revenue stream, FY2002–FY07	156
Technology focus	159
Enzon’s product portfolio	163
PEGylation technology	164
Other injectable products portfolio	167
Single-chain antibody technology	169
Profitability, FY1997-FY2002	170
Liquidity, FY1997-FY2001	172
2001 Performance benchmarking	173
CHAPTER 7 NEKTAR	174
Key findings	174
Current positioning: revenue breakdown in 2001	175
Strategic outlook	176
Company Strategy	177
Introduction to Nektar	177
Assessment of strategic position	177
Alliance network	179
Portfolio and pipeline analysis	180
Technology focus	180
Nektar’s product portfolio	183
PEGylation technologies	183
Inhalable particle engineering	192
Profitability, 1997-2001	198
Liquidity, 1997-2001	200
2001 Performance benchmarking	201
CHAPTER 8 NOVEN	203
Key Findings	203
Current positioning: revenue breakdown in 2001	204
Strategic outlook	205
Company Strategy	206
Introduction to Noven	206
Assessment of strategic position	206
Alliance network	210
Portfolio and pipeline analysis	213
Technology focus	213
Transdermal technology	216
Transmucosal technology	225
Profitability, 1997-2001	228
Liquidity, 1997-2001	232
2001 Performance benchmarking	233
Key-events shaping the corporate activity 1997-2001	234
CHAPTER 9 POWDERJECT	237
Key Findings	237
Current positioning: revenue breakdown in 2001	238
Strategic outlook	239
Company Strategy	240
Introduction to PowderJect	240
Assessment of strategic position	240
Portfolio and pipeline analysis	243
Therapy area focus in 2001	243
Forecast revenue stream, 2002-07	244
Therapy area forecasts to 2007	244
Marketed Franchise	245
Profitability, 1997-2001	252
Liquidity, 1997-2001	254
2001 Performance benchmarking	256
Key events shaping corporate activity 1997–2001	257
CHAPTER 10 SEPRACOR	260
Key findings	260
Current positioning: revenue breakdown in 2001	261
Strategic outlook	262
Company strategy	263
Introduction to Sepracor	263
Assessment of strategic position	264
Alliance network	269
Portfolio and pipeline analysis	272
Technology focus	272
Single isomer technology	275
Profitability, 1997-2001	294
Liquidity, 1997-2001	296
2001 Performance benchmarking	299
Key events shaping corporate activity 1997–2001	300
CHAPTER 11 SKYEPHARMA	305
Key findings	305
Current positioning: revenue breakdown in 2001	306
Strategic outlook	307
Company strategy	308
Introduction to SkyePharma	308
Assessment of strategic position	308
Alliance network	310
Portfolio and pipeline analysis	311
Technology focus	311
SkyePharma’s product portfolio	315
Oral technology	315
Inhalation technology	318
Injectable technology	322
List of Tables
Table 1: Datamonitor’s proprietary value rating of 8 drug delivery companies	8
Table 2: Revenues of 15 drug delivery companies, 2000-01	14
Table 3: R&D spend of 13 drug delivery companies, 2000-01	17
Table 4: Operating profit of 15 drug delivery companies, 2000-01	19
Table 5: Datamonitor’s proprietary value rating of 8 drug delivery companies	24
Table 6: Technological focus of 8 drug delivery companies profiled by Datamonitor	26
Table 7: Nastech’s product pipeline	55
Table 8: Therapeutic focus of 8 drug delivery companies profiled by Datamonitor	59
Table 9: Number of marketed and pipeline drug delivery products by deal type	71
Table 10: Alkermes’s alliance network, 2001	85
Table 11: Technological breakdown of Alkermes’s portfolio, 2002	87
Table 12: Alkermes's injectable sustained release technology portfolio, 2001	91
Table 13: Sales of currently marketed hGH products, 2000-01	93
Table 14: Alkermes's inhalable technology portfolio, 2001	97
Table 15: Alkermes's intra-cerebral technology portfolio, 2001	100
Table 16: Summary of Alkermes’s historical M&A activity, 1997-2000	106
Table 17: Summary of Alkermes historical agreements, 1997-2000	106
Table 18: Aradigm’s alliance network, 2002	116
Table 19: Technological breakdown of Aradigm’s portfolio, 2002	118
Table 20: Inhalable technology portfolio, 2001	127
Table 21: Aradigm’s revenues and operating expenditure, 2000-01	139
Table 22: Aradigm’s corporate alliances, 1997-2000	144
Table 23: Enzon’s ethical revenue stream, FY2002–FY07	149
Table 24: Enzon’s alliance network, 2002	153
Table 25: Enzon’s corporate revenue by business area, FY1999–FY2001	154
Table 26: Enzon’s ethical revenues, 1999–2001	155
Table 27: Forecast for Enzon’s ethical revenue stream, FY2002–FY07	156
Table 28: Comparison between Datamonitor and analyst consensus forecasts for Enzon’s currently marketed products, FY2002–FY03	158
Table 29: Technological breakdown of Enzon’s portfolio, 2002	161
Table 30: Enzon’s product portfolio, 2002	163
Table 31: PEGylation technology portfolio, 2002	164
Table 32: Other injectable products in Enzon’s portfolio, 2002	167
Table 33: SCA technology portfolio, 2002	169
Table 34: Enzon’s profitability performance, FY1999–FY2001	170
Table 35: Nektar’s alliance network, 2002	179
Table 36: Technological breakdown of Nektar’s portfolio, 2002	181
Table 37: PEGylation technology portfolio, 2002	184
Table 38: Inhalable engineering and supercritical technologies portfolio, 2002	193
Table 39: Nektar’s profitability performance, 1999–2001	198
Table 40: Noven’s alliance network, 2002	210
Table 41: Technological breakdown of Noven’s portfolio, 2002	213
Table 42: Noven’s transdermal portfolio and pipeline, 2001	219
Table 43: Noven’s transmucosal portfolio, 2001	226
Table 44: Noven’s revenue structure, 2000-01	229
Table 45: Noven’s operating costs, 2000-01	230
Table 46: Summary of Noven’s historical agreements, 1997 - 2000	234
Table 47: Breakdown of PowderJect’s sales in 2000 and 2001	243
Table 48: Forecast sales for PowderJect’s marketed products, 2002, 2004 and 2007	244
Table 49: PowderJect’s marketed products, 2001	245
Table 50: PowderJect’s R&D pipeline, 2002	251
Table 51: Forecast sales for PowderJect’s marketed portfolio, 2002–07	252
Table 52: Summary of PowderJect’s historical M&A activity, 1997–2000	257
Table 53: Summary of PowderJect’s historical agreements, 1997–02	258
Table 54: Sepracor’s portfolio, 2002	272
Table 55: Single isomer technology portfolio, 2001	276
Table 56: Summary of Sepracor’ historical agreements, 1997–2000	301
Table 57: SkyePharma’s alliance network, 2002	310
Table 58: Breakdown of SkyePharma’s portfolio by technology, 2002	313
Table 59: Oral technology portfolio, 2002	315
Table 60: Inhalation technology portfolio, 2002	318
Table 61: Injectable technology portfolio, 2002	322
Table 62: Topical technology portfolio, 2002	326
Table 63: Solubilization technology portfolio, 2002	327
Table 64: SkyePharma’s profitability performance, 1999-2001	328
Table 65: SkyePharma’s funding and liquid assets,1999–2001	330
Table 66: Breakdown of Weston Medical’s portfolio, 2002	342
Table 67: Weston Medical's Intraject technology portfolio, 2001 2002?	348
Table 68: Summary of Weston Medical’s historical agreements, 1998-2000	359
List of Figures
Figure 1: Strategic focus of key drug delivery companies	5
Figure 2: Breakdown of marketed and pipeline products by partner type	7
Figure 3: Revenues of 15 drug delivery companies in 2001	15
Figure 4: 2001 R&D expenditure of 13 drug delivery companies	18
Figure 5: Operating profits of 15 drug delivery companies, 2001	20
Figure 6: Comparison of operating profit growth, revenue growth and R&D spend of 13 drug delivery companies, 2001	21
Figure 7: Comparison of overall portfolio value rating and average rating per product of 8 drug delivery companies	25
Figure 8: Breakdown of product portfolios by delivery technology, 2001	27
Figure 9: Illustration of NOBEX’s drug-polymer conjugate oral drug delivery system	36
Figure 10: Breakdown by therapy area of the product portfolios of 8 drug delivery companies, 2001	60
Figure 11: Strategic focus of key drug delivery companies	69
Figure 12: Breakdown of marketed and pipeline products by partner type	72
Figure 13: Ratio of marketed to pipeline products, 2001	73
Figure 14: Alkermes’s performance, 2000-01	80
Figure 15: Assessment of Alkermes’s strategic position, 2002	81
Figure 16: Evolution of Alkermes’s technological strategy, 2002	88
Figure 17: Assessment of Alkermes’s portfolio strength by technology, 2002	89
Figure 18: Alkermes’s profitability stream, 1997–2001	101
Figure 19: Alkermes’s funding and liquid assets,1997–2001	103
Figure 20: Liquidity and business momentum ratios, 2001	105
Figure 21: Aradigm’s financial performance, 2001	110
Figure 22: Assessment of Aradigm’s strategic position, 2002	111
Figure 23: Assessment of Aradigm’s portfolio strength by product, 2002	119
Figure 24: Aradigm’s profitability stream, 1997-2001	138
Figure 25: Aradigm’s funding and liquid assets, 1997-2001	141
Figure 26: Liquidity and profitability ratios, 2001	143
Figure 27: Enzon’s financial performance, FY1999–FY2001	148
Figure 28: Enzon’s ethical revenue stream, FY2002–FY07	149
Figure 29: Assessment of Enzon’s strategic position, 2002	150
Figure 30: Enzon’s corporate revenues by business area, 1999–2001	154
Figure 31: Enzon’s ethical revenue by product, FY2001	155
Figure 32: Enzon’s ethical revenue stream forecasts, FY2002–FY07	157
Figure 33: Enzon’s core technological platforms, 2002	159
Figure 34: Evolution of Enzon’s technological strategy	161
Figure 35: Assessment of Enzon’s portfolio strength by technology, 2007	162
Figure 36: Enzon’s profitability performance, FY1997–FY2001	170
Figure 37: Enzon’s funding and liquid assets,FY1997–FY2001	172
Figure 38: Liquidity and profitability ratios, 2001	173
Figure 39: Nektar’s financial performance, 1999–2001	175
Figure 40: Assessment of Nektar’s strategic position, 2002	176
Figure 41: Nektar’s technology focus, 2002	180
Figure 42: Evolution of Nektar’s technological strategy	181
Figure 43: Assessment of Nektar’s portfolio strength by technology, 2007	182
Figure 44: Nektar’s profitability performance, 1997–2001	198
Figure 45: Nektar’s funding and liquid assets,1997–2001	200
Figure 46: Liquidity and profitability ratios, 2001	201
Figure 47: Noven’s financial performance, 2001	204
Figure 48: Assessment of Noven’s strategic position , 2002	205
Figure 49: Evolution of Noven’s technological strategy	214
Figure 50: Assessment of Noven’s portfolio strength by technology	215
Figure 51: Noven’s profitability stream, 1997-2001	228
Figure 52: Noven’s funding and liquid assets, 1997 - 2001	232
Figure 53: Liquidity and debt ratios, 2001	233
Figure 54: PowderJect’s performance, 2000–01	238
Figure 55: Assessment of PowderJect’s strategic position, 2002	239
Figure 56: PowderJect’s profitability stream, 1997–2001	253
Figure 57: PowderJect’s funding and liquid assets,1997–2001	255
Figure 58: Liquidity and business momentum ratios, 2001	256
Figure 59: Sepracor’s financial performance, 2000–01	261
Figure 60: Assessment of Sepracor’s strategic position, 2002	262
Figure 61: Assessment of Sepracor’s portfolio strength	273
Figure 62: Sepracor’s profitability stream, 1997–2001	294
Figure 63: Sepracor’s funding and liquid assets, 1997–2001	297
Figure 64: Liquidity and profitability ratios, 2001	299
Figure 65: SkyePharma’s financial performance, 1999–2001	306
Figure 66: Assessment of SkyePharma’s strategic position, 2002	307
Figure 67: SkyePharma’s organizational structure, 2002	308
Figure 68: SkyePharma’s core technological platforms, 2002	311
Figure 69: Evolution of SkyePharma’s technological strategy	313
Figure 70: Assessment of SkyePharma’s portfolio strength by technology, 2007	314
Figure 71: SkyePharma’s profitability performance, 1997-2001	328
Figure 72: SkyePharma’s funding and liquid assets,1997–2001	330
Figure 73: Liquidity and profitability ratios, 2001	331
Figure 74: Weston Medical’s financial performance, 2000–01	333
Figure 75: Assessment of Weston Medical’s strategic position, 2002	334
Figure 76: Assessment of Weston Medical’s portfolio strength, 2002	343
Figure 77: Weston Medical’s profitability stream, 1999-2001	354
Figure 78: Weston Medical’s funding and liquid assets, 1999 - 2001	357
Figure 79: Liquidity and business momentum ratios, 2001	35

Top of Page

Table of Contents

For full details, please email jenniferc@cmsinfo.com

Top of Page

Buy now!

Single-user PDF

 USD 12800.00   

Your personal guarantee

Top of Page