Lilly gets good news on insulin

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Pfizer Inc.’s decision last week to abandon its generic insulin project is good news for Eli Lilly and Co.

It demonstrates that there are high barriers to the insulin market, from which Lilly derives more than $3.6 billion per year. And it gives Lilly more reason to hope its insulin revenue will keep growing even after it loses U.S. patent protection on its best-selling Humalog brand in 2013.

That’s important for Indianapolis-based Lilly because it is in the midst of losing patent protection on four other blockbuster drugs, which collectively will sap it of more than $10 billion in annual revenue.

Medicine for diabetes, a disease growing rapidly around the world, could provide a revenue boost for Lilly as it tries to bring new drugs to market.

“Although the insulin market should be highly attractive to the pharma industry, competition seems to be decreasing, rather than the opposite,” Lars Hevreng, an analyst at Denmark-based SEB Enskilda, wrote in a March 13 report. Enskilda follows Denmark-based Novo Nordisk A/S, which is the global leader in the insulin business.

New York-based Pfizer, the world’s largest pharma company, in October 2010 announced a partnership with India-based Biocon Ltd. to make and sell generic versions of mealtime and once-a-day insulins in Europe as early as this year and in the United States as early as 2015.

But after spending more than $200 million, Pfizer called it off.

"The companies have agreed that, due to the individual priorities for their respective biosimilars businesses, it is in their best interest to move forward independently," Pfizer and Biocon said in a joint statement issued March 13.

Global insulin sales total $18 billion a year, with just $3 billion of that claimed by generics, Hevreng noted.

In the United States, the 2010 health care reform law allowed, for the first time, generic equivalent versions of biotech drugs, which insulins are. The rules fleshing out the law have yet to be finalized, although the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services released draft rules in February.

Greenwood-based Elona Biotechnologies Inc. has been building a $28 million plant in order to manufacture generic insulin. It is run by Ron Zimmerman, a former Lilly researcher.

Some European countries already have regulatory pathways for generic biotech drugs, which are called biosimilars. But the paucity of generic competitors has propped up sales of some drugs that saw their patents expire long ago, such as Lilly’s Humulin, which lost its U.S. patent in 2000.

Last year, Lilly sold $1.3 billion of Humulin and $2.4 billion of Humalog. Wall Street analysts generally do not predict a drop-off in Humalog revenue even after its patent expires in 2013. And most predict flat sales for Humulin, even as late as 2017.

“We do believe that they’re going to come to the market in the U.S., sometime in the future,” Enrique Conterno, president of Lilly’s diabetes division, said of generic insulins, in a December interview.

But he added that Lilly expects the U.S. government to require some clinical testing of generic insulins—something typically not required for generic versions of chemical drugs. That raises the cost of entry.

Conterno also expects that generic insulins will not be regarded as “highly interchangeable,” meaning makers of generic insulins could not rely on pharmacists to automatically substitute cheaper generics when a physician prescribed one of the brand-name insulins.

If that proves to be the case, makers of generic insulin would also need a sales and marketing team to promote their versions of insulin.

For those reasons, Conterno said of generic insulins, “We don’t believe that they’re going to be highly successful.”


Post a comment to this story

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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. Apologies for the wall of text. I promise I had this nicely formatted in paragraphs in Notepad before pasting here.

  2. I believe that is incorrect Sir, the people's tax-dollars are NOT paying for the companies investment. Without the tax-break the company would be paying an ADDITIONAL $11.1 million in taxes ON TOP of their $22.5 Million investment (Building + IT), for a total of $33.6M or a 50% tax rate. Also, the article does not specify what the total taxes were BEFORE the break. Usually such a corporate tax-break is a 'discount' not a 100% wavier of tax obligations. For sake of example lets say the original taxes added up to $30M over 10 years. $12.5M, New Building $10.0M, IT infrastructure $30.0M, Total Taxes (Example Number) == $52.5M ININ's Cost - $1.8M /10 years, Tax Break (Building) - $0.75M /10 years, Tax Break (IT Infrastructure) - $8.6M /2 years, Tax Breaks (against Hiring Commitment: 430 new jobs /2 years) == 11.5M Possible tax breaks. ININ TOTAL COST: $41M Even if you assume a 100% break, change the '30.0M' to '11.5M' and you can see the Company will be paying a minimum of $22.5, out-of-pocket for their capital-investment - NOT the tax-payers. Also note, much of this money is being spent locally in Indiana and it is creating 430 jobs in your city. I admit I'm a little unclear which tax-breaks are allocated to exactly which expenses. Clearly this is all oversimplified but I think we have both made our points! :) Sorry for the long post.

  3. Clearly, there is a lack of a basic understanding of economics. It is not up to the company to decide what to pay its workers. If companies were able to decide how much to pay their workers then why wouldn't they pay everyone minimum wage? Why choose to pay $10 or $14 when they could pay $7? The answer is that companies DO NOT decide how much to pay workers. It is the market that dictates what a worker is worth and how much they should get paid. If Lowe's chooses to pay a call center worker $7 an hour it will not be able to hire anyone for the job, because all those people will work for someone else paying the market rate of $10-$14 an hour. This forces Lowes to pay its workers that much. Not because it wants to pay them that much out of the goodness of their heart, but because it has to pay them that much in order to stay competitive and attract good workers.

  4. GOOD DAY to you I am Mr Howell Henry, a Reputable, Legitimate & an accredited money Lender. I loan money out to individuals in need of financial assistance. Do you have a bad credit or are you in need of money to pay bills? i want to use this medium to inform you that i render reliable beneficiary assistance as I'll be glad to offer you a loan at 2% interest rate to reliable individuals. Services Rendered include: *Refinance *Home Improvement *Inventor Loans *Auto Loans *Debt Consolidation *Horse Loans *Line of Credit *Second Mortgage *Business Loans *Personal Loans *International Loans. Please write back if interested. Upon Response, you'll be mailed a Loan application form to fill. (No social security and no credit check, 100% Guaranteed!) I Look forward permitting me to be of service to you. You can contact me via e-mail howellhenryloanfirm@gmail.com Yours Sincerely MR Howell Henry(MD)

  5. It is sad to see these races not have a full attendance. The Indy Car races are so much more exciting than Nascar. It seems to me the commenters here are still a little upset with Tony George from a move he made 20 years ago. It was his decision to make, not yours. He lost his position over it. But I believe the problem in all pro sports is the escalating price of admission. In todays economy, people have to pay much more for food and gas. The average fan cannot attend many events anymore. It's gotten priced out of most peoples budgets.