IBJNews

Roche hopes to prosper from austerity

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Executives at Roche Diagnostics expect the wave of austerity measures being taken by western governments—including the United States—to as much as double its sales of fluid- and DNA-based tests in the next three years, according to Bloomberg News.

That’s because cash-strapped government-run health plans will want to use the tests to make sure they’re not paying for expensive drugs that won’t benefit the patients who take them.

Roche Diagnostics, which runs its North American operations out of Indianapolis, won approval in August for a new test to identify end-stage skin cancer patients with a specific gene mutation, who will benefit from a new skin cancer drug called Zelboraf, also made by Roche. Roche Diagnostics also makes tests for such things as human papillomavirus, which causes cervical cancer.

“No country is going to be able to afford to increase the percentage of GDP spent on health care,” Roche Diagnostics Chief Operating Officer Daniel O’Day told Bloomberg. “What they’re all looking for is how we can take this certain pie we have for health care and better leverage it for society.”

Roche expects growth at the diagnostics unit to exceed the market this year, outpacing the drugmaker’s larger pharmaceuticals unit, which is suffering from declining revenue of its best-seller Avastin, an expensive cancer drug.

Roche got 22 percent of its revenue last year from diagnostics. Its professional diagnostics unit, which includes sales of the machines and the tests O’Day is touting, posted sales of roughly $880 million in North American sales last year.

Roche is developing a companion diagnostic test for lung cancer patients whose tumors have high concentrations of the Met protein, who could then be treated by Roche’s cancer drug Tarceva. Also, Roche is submitting to regulators a new test and drug to treat breast cancer.

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. How can any company that has the cash and other assets be allowed to simply foreclose and not pay the debt? Simon, pay the debt and sell the property yourself. Don't just stiff the bank with the loan and require them to find a buyer.

  2. If you only knew....

  3. The proposal is structured in such a way that a private company (who has competitors in the marketplace) has struck a deal to get "financing" through utility ratepayers via IPL. Competitors to BlueIndy are at disadvantage now. The story isn't "how green can we be" but how creative "financing" through captive ratepayers benefits a company whose proposal should sink or float in the competitive marketplace without customer funding. If it was a great idea there would be financing available. IBJ needs to be doing a story on the utility ratemaking piece of this (which is pretty complicated) but instead it suggests that folks are whining about paying for being green.

  4. The facts contained in your post make your position so much more credible than those based on sheer emotion. Thanks for enlightening us.

  5. Please consider a couple of economic realities: First, retail is more consolidated now than it was when malls like this were built. There used to be many department stores. Now, in essence, there is one--Macy's. Right off, you've eliminated the need for multiple anchor stores in malls. And in-line retailers have consolidated or folded or have stopped building new stores because so much of their business is now online. The Limited, for example, Next, malls are closing all over the country, even some of the former gems are now derelict.Times change. And finally, as the income level of any particular area declines, so do the retail offerings. Sad, but true.

ADVERTISEMENT