IBJNews

Patent expirations up pressure on Lilly

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Year In Review
More
Stories
State's economy stuck
                              in neutral Indictment: Durham looted Fair Finance Ballard cruises to second term City backs string of high-profile projects Manning's injury sends Colts into tailspin Downtown mall stung by loss of Nordstrom Right-to-work battle derails legislative session General Assembly overhauls K-12 education Real estate meltdown leaves developers reeling Spate of Indiana firms lines up for IPOs Rolls-Royce relocated 2,500 jobs to downtown Openings launch new era for tourism biz Patent expirations up pressure on Lilly Las Vegas crash saps IndyCar momentum


Newsmakers
Simon
                              takes on Amazon.com Melangton Daniels White in crosshairs as reformers target IPS

Eli Lilly and Co. lost patent protection on its $5-billion-a-year best-seller Zyprexa in October, plunging the company into the long-awaited zone of uncertainty that it calls “Years YZ.”

But instead of pursuing a merger, CEO John Lechleiter kept the Indianapolis-based drugmaker’s chips bet entirely on the ability of its research and development teams to launch new drugs to offset the massive revenue losses the company is now suffering.

Starting with cancer drug Gemzar in late 2010, Lilly began to lose patent protection on a string of five blockbuster drugs, ending with Cymbalta in 2013, which have accounted for nearly half of Lilly’s annual revenue. Zyprexa, an antipsychotic, was the biggest.

Lilly’s top brass no longer makes an effort to suggest that the next three years won’t be ugly for Lilly’s balance sheet: Revenue and profits will almost certainly decline. The company’s stock price, already stagnant for three years, likely will remain so.

Instead, executives now take the Paul Harvey approach, constantly telling the rest of the story. They point to how sales of Lilly’s products in animal health, emerging markets and Japan are growing rapidly, which will offset some of the losses from its blockbuster drugs.

Some, but by no means all. To help patch up the rest of the revenue hole, Lilly has been slashing staff: 5,500 workers worldwide and nearly 2,000 in Indianapolis.

After 2014, Lilly officials promise, its pipeline will have produced new medicines that will put the company back on a path to growth.

It had certainly better, because if Lilly hasn’t generated anything new by 2016 and 2017—when it will lose patent protection on its newer star drugs—Alimta, Strattera and Cialis—the company will be in serious trouble.

Lechleiter constantly touts the historic number of molecules Lilly is testing in humans. (Currently 66.) But Lilly’s pipeline production has been disappointing since at least the 2005 launch of the diabetes injection Byetta.

Lilly did launch in Europe this year the potential blockbuster Byrdueon—a sister drug to Byetta—with California-based partner Amylin Pharmaceuticals Inc. But after a legal dispute between the companies, Lilly sold the rights to Bydureon back to Amylin for current and future payments up to $1.5 billion.•

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. President Obama has referred to the ACA as "Obamacare" any number of times; one thing it is not, if you don't qualify for a subsidy, is "affordable".

  2. One important correction, Indiana does not have an ag-gag law, it was soundly defeated, or at least changed. It was stripped of everything to do with undercover pictures and video on farms. There is NO WAY on earth that ag gag laws will survive a constitutional challenge. None. Period. Also, the reason they are trying to keep you out, isn't so we don't show the blatant abuse like slamming pigs heads into the ground, it's show we don't show you the legal stuf... the anal electroctions, the cutting off of genitals without anesthesia, the tail docking, the cutting off of beaks, the baby male chicks getting thrown alive into a grinder, the deplorable conditions, downed animals, animals sitting in their own excrement, the throat slitting, the bolt guns. It is all deplorable behavior that doesn't belong in a civilized society. The meat, dairy and egg industries are running scared right now, which is why they are trying to pass these ridiculous laws. What a losing battle.

  3. Eating there years ago the food was decent, nothing to write home about. Weird thing was Javier tried to pass off the story the way he ended up in Indy was he took a bus he thought was going to Minneapolis. This seems to be the same story from the founder of Acapulco Joe's. Stopped going as I never really did trust him after that or the quality of what being served.

  4. Indianapolis...the city of cricket, chains, crime and call centers!

  5. "In real life, a farmer wants his livestock as happy and health as possible. Such treatment give the best financial return." I have to disagree. What's in the farmer's best interest is to raise as many animals as possible as quickly as possible as cheaply as possible. There is a reason grass-fed beef is more expensive than corn-fed beef: it costs more to raise. Since consumers often want more food for lower prices, the incentive is for farmers to maximize their production while minimizing their costs. Obviously, having very sick or dead animals does not help the farmer, however, so there is a line somewhere. Where that line is drawn is the question.

ADVERTISEMENT