IBJNews

Lilly counting on diabetes products to challenge larger rivals

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Eli Lilly and Co. is betting on a “broad” range of diabetes products including pills, insulins and a once-a-week treatment to take on bigger competitors, said Enrique Conterno, president of Lilly Diabetes.

Lilly is working on two experimental long-acting insulins, including a version of Sanofi’s top-selling Lantus, and therapies in all the main new classes of diabetes drugs. As IBJ reported in May, the Indianapolis drugmaker has been talking up its diabetes pipeline as incidence of the chronic disease rises around the globe.

“No one that I am aware about has this kind of pipeline,” Conterno told Bloomberg in an interview in Berlin, where he was attending the European Association for the Study of Diabetes conference. “Some companies are much more focused on one or two classes, some are more focused on one product. This will provide us a competitive advantage. We like where we stand.”

Diabetes afflicted 366 million people worldwide last year, according to the International Diabetes Federation. Drugmakers are developing new products as the market is likely to grow to more than $58 billion in 2018 from $35 billion now, Standard & Poor’s said in an Oct. 4 report.

Lilly, the maker of the Humalog and Humulin insulins, lost ground in recent years to Denmark’s Novo Nordisk A/S, the world’s biggest insulin maker, and Sanofi, whose Lantus garnered$5.1 billion in sales in 2011.

Lilly reorganized its diabetes operations almost three years ago, Conterno said. Last year, the company ended a decade-long diabetes partnership with Amylin Pharmaceuticals Inc., the maker of Byetta and Bydureon. This allowed Lilly to focus on its own diabetes pipeline. Many products are developed with Germany’s Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH as part of a deal struck in 2011 to work on diabetes drugs.

In June, Lilly presented mid-stage trial results for a new long-acting insulin, dubbed LY2605541. The therapy would directly compete with Lantus and Novo’s Tresiba, which is currently being reviewed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

LY2605541 matched Lantus in blood-sugar control while helping patients lose weight, unlike all other insulins, the data showed. However, patients taking the Lilly product had an increase in liver enzymes, a potential sign of liver damage, compared with those taking Lantus, the trial results showed. Lilly also published promising results on the SGLT2 inhibitor empagliflozin and its once-a-week experimental GLP-1 agonist, known as dulaglutide.

People suffering from diabetes lack the insulin needed to convert blood sugar into energy. GLP-1 agonists such as dulaglutide mimic the function of a digestive hormone that stimulates the pancreas to produce insulin after meals. SGLT2 inhibitors reduce glucose reabsorption in the kidney, leading to excretion of excess glucose via the urine.

“Looks like we’ve made good progress,” Peruvian-born Conterno said last week. “Our competitors are talking a lot more about us, and that’s a very good sign.”

The decision to end the Amylin partnership wasn’t easy, Conterno said.

The move was, “in essence, a bet on dulaglutide,” he said. “We’ve gotten more and more data and the product so far looks very, very good. We like what our prospects are.”

Dulaglutide, if approved, would compete with Byetta and Bydureon, which Lilly is still selling outside the U.S., according to Conterno.

Bristol-Myers Squibb Co., which acquired Amylin for $5.3 billion earlier this year, and partner AstraZeneca Plc will soon take over the products, he said.

Lilly will ensure the transition for Byetta and Bydureon is made “in the best way,” Conterno said.

Its competitors are starting to take notice. “Lilly really seriously wants to be back in the innovation-driven space,” Mads Krogsgaard Thomsen, Novo Nordisk’s chief scientific officer, said in an interview last week in Berlin. “My eyes are clearly on what Lilly is doing because they are the ones that have a pipeline in our area of R&D, unlike others.”

The company is developing its new long-acting, LY2605541 alongside a generic version of Lantus, also a long-acting insulin. If both were approved, the products would compete with each other.

Lilly plans to move ahead with both projects, Conterno said. The Lilly version of Lantus would be introduced as soon as Sanofi loses the patent on the product in 2015, he said.

“Assuming both complete trials successfully, we intend to launch both,” Conterno said. “Clearly the innovative basal insulin can be a game changer.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. By Mr. Lee's own admission, he basically ran pro-bono ads on the billboard. Paying advertisers didn't want ads on a controversial, ugly billboard that turned off customers. At least one of Mr. Lee's free advertisers dropped out early because they found that Mr. Lee's advertising was having negative impact. So Mr. Lee is disingenous to say the city now owes him for lost revenue. Mr. Lee quickly realized his monstrosity had a dim future and is trying to get the city to bail him out. And that's why the billboard came down so quickly.

  2. Merchants Square is back. The small strip center to the south of 116th is 100% leased, McAlister’s is doing well in the outlot building. The former O’Charleys is leased but is going through permitting with the State and the town of Carmel. Mac Grill is closing all of their Indy locations (not just Merchants) and this will allow for a new restaurant concept to backfill both of their locations. As for the north side of 116th a new dinner movie theater and brewery is under construction to fill most of the vacancy left by Hobby Lobby and Old Navy.

  3. Yes it does have an ethics commission which enforce the law which prohibits 12 specific items. google it

  4. Thanks for reading and replying. If you want to see the differentiation for research, speaking and consulting, check out the spreadsheet I linked to at the bottom of the post; it is broken out exactly that way. I can only include so much detail in a blog post before it becomes something other than a blog post.

  5. 1. There is no allegation of corruption, Marty, to imply otherwise if false. 2. Is the "State Rule" a law? I suspect not. 3. Is Mr. Woodruff obligated via an employment agreement (contractual obligation) to not work with the engineering firm? 4. In many states a right to earn a living will trump non-competes and other contractual obligations, does Mr. Woodruff's personal right to earn a living trump any contractual obligations that might or might not be out there. 5. Lawyers in state government routinely go work for law firms they were formally working with in their regulatory actions. You can see a steady stream to firms like B&D from state government. It would be interesting for IBJ to do a review of current lawyers and find out how their past decisions affected the law firms clients. Since there is a buffer between regulated company and the regulator working for a law firm technically is not in violation of ethics but you have to wonder if decisions were made in favor of certain firms and quid pro quo jobs resulted. Start with the DOI in this review. Very interesting.

ADVERTISEMENT