Latest value deal adds $155m order book and massive recurring revenue potential overnight…
Kontrol Technologies seize the opportunity to stamp out energy waste in buildings.
The post Latest value deal adds $155m order book and massive recurring revenue potential overnight… appeared first on Value the Markets.
Collectively, these buildings use a lot of energy.
It’s hardly a surprise—given their scale, they probably need to.
But while this may be the case, there are also severe problems when it comes to the way in which this energy is actually consumed…
You see, it’s currently estimated that around 30% of the energy used by North America’s commercial buildings is wasted.
Not only that, but it’s now thought that these buildings are also responsible for up to 40% of the region’s greenhouse gas emissions.
Whatever way you look at it, it’s an unsustainable situation.
And it becomes all the more concerning when you consider that, by 2050, the goal is for every commercial building in the world to achieve net-zero energy use.
It’s not as if the industry can hide from these problems.
After all, it’s thought that buildings will be responsible for consuming more than half of the world’s energy by as soon as 2030.
So, with close to a third of that energy currently being wasted, there’s still some way to go before the problem is fixed.
Excitingly, these issues have given rise to an enormous opportunity in making commercial buildings cleaner and more efficient when it comes to energy consumption.
In fact, the addressable market for such ‘smart buildings’ is already thought to be worth more than $100 billion a year in the US and $600 billion globally.
And this is why Kontrol Technologies represents such an exciting investment right now.
You see, thanks in part to the transformational acquisition it has just completed, which adds an order book worth in excess of $155 million to its operations…
Kontrol is poised and ready to claim a very significant slice of the Smart Building market as it continues to boom.
As it does so, it will be the smart investors who got in on the ground floor who are most likely to enjoy game-changing returns.
To learn more about how the deep value deal that has just added a $155 million order book to Kontrol Technologies’ roster, READ OUR EXCLUSIVE REPORT
Blue-chip clients and powerful data insights—Kontrol’s strong fundamental position
Before considering Kontrol’s recent acquisition, it’s worth noting that the company already represents a highly attractive investment proposition.
Indeed, by deploying the latest building automation devices and patented energy-monitoring technology, Kontrol has not only been able to establish a portfolio of major blue-chip clients paying out strong recurring revenues….
But, thanks to the data it collects, it is consistently able to improve the quality of its service by increasing its own knowledge of how to reduce costs, create better energy efficiencies, and lower GHG emissions.
Indeed, thanks to the solid foundation built along with the new acquisition, Kontrol anticipates 2021 revenues of between $33 and $35 million.
That’s more than double the $13 million it generated in the 2020 financial year.
But still, though this sum is already extremely promising, the fact is that Kontrol is now ready for much bigger things.
In fact, the business has even identified a clear path to $100 million-a-year turnover.
How does it plan to do deliver on this?
Well, for one thing, Kontrol expects to enjoy significant natural demand growth from customers looking to make their existing buildings more energy-efficient and ‘smart’.
But, perhaps most excitingly, the business is also making key strategic acquisitions that accelerate its revenue growth even further.
As we’ll see next, the company has just taken a major step forward in this area, closing on a deal that is not only its biggest to date but also puts it well on its way to hitting its ambitious turnover targets.
The recent acquisition of Global HVAC could be a game-changer in itself
Kontrol is well-known for making smart and strategic acquisitions.
The focus has always been on value, with the company searching out the ideal combination of solid cash flows and an attractive valuation.
It’s also keen to always ensure the smoothest transition possible and the most effective integration of its own technology and practices.
The approach was already well established, having underpinned a total of five smart deals throughout Kontrol’s history.
But it has never been used to greater effect than with the group’s most recent acquisition of a more traditional building solutions business called Global HVAC & Automation.
Indeed, this deal stands to be an absolute game-changer for Kontrol that could transform its bottom line like never before.
How come?
Well, the simple fact of the matter is that with the consolidation of Global HVAC & Automation, Kontrol has established an order book that’s worth in excess of $155 million over the next three years.
It’s worth taking note of that figure again:
$155 million.
Make no mistake, for a company of Kontrol’s relativelysmallsize right now, this kind of additional revenue—even if it is only partly realized—could be hugely transformative.
But there’s actually an even more exciting angle here that could see the true turnover from this acquisition exceed even this already significant potential.
You see, until now, Global HVAC has focused almost entirely on larger, one-off projects that generate substantial, but still only one-off revenues.
By the way, in case you’ve not come across the term before, HVAC refers to heating, ventilation, and air conditioning. These are the key factors that contribute to a building’s overall ‘energy consumption and health’ in energy efficiency terms.
Here’s the thing, though…
Being a more traditional, family-run business, Global HVAC has not really exploited the opportunity to provide ongoing software and services to clients that would generate ongoing, recurring revenues.
Kontrol is in the perfect position to change this, and it intends to.
By integrating its own smart software with the traditional heating, ventilation, and air conditioning services offered by Global HVAC, Kontrol could potentially turn the firm’s $155 million order book into an ongoing source of recurring revenue that could fuel huge exponential growth.
And all this for an acquisition cost of just $7 million, along with an additional vendor performance payment equal to 45% of adjusted three years cumulative earnings after tax in excess of $4.5 million.
Not only does Kontrol already have this cash on its balance sheet, but—all in—it equates to an acquisition price of just 0.25X revenues!
Everything adds up to make Kontrol an extremely attractive addition to any portfolio.
But the investment casedoesn’t even end there.
Indeed, we’ve still not even considered one of the most exciting projects the company is currently working on…
Kontrol’s real-time air-analyzer and early viral detection technology represents yet another exciting catalyst for growth
The natural tailwind from the growing demand to make buildings smarter and more energy-efficient is one thing that will excite investors about Kontrol.
The recent acquisition of Global HVAC and the $155 million order book is undoubtedly another.
But the fact is, this organizationis also sitting on a ground-breaking piece of technology that could change the way smart buildings work and provide a whole new level of protection to people working in buildings all across North America and beyond.
It’s called BioCloud, and it is designed to to detect airborne pathogens like viruses, bacteria, and fungi.
Even without the recent coronavirus pandemic, this would be a huge deal. But now, of course, it’s bigger than ever.
In fact, the technology has already been extremely well received and its development has attracted around $2.5 million in grants from the National Research Council of Canada and the Ontario Government.
For a closer look at the blue-sky potential presented by BioCloud, the game-changing air and viral monitoring technology developed by Kontrol Technologies, READ OUR EXCLUSIVE REPORT
And be clear, this is a technology that is actively being used now.
BioCloud is not something still waiting to be finalized…
It’s not pie-in-the-sky…
It’s already being utilized by customers like the Canadian Olympic Committee, which is using it to help safeguard Team Canada at the Tokyo Olympics.
As you’d expect, the market for real-time viral detection in the air around us is set to explode in the coming months and years, and will surely become a multi-million—if not billion-dollar—industry in itself.
So, with its BioCloud units already making waves in the industry and getting noticed, Kontrol looks set to add yet another potentially huge revenue stream to its bottom line.
The picture here is clearly a bright one, and there is no wonder the company has a good level of internal share ownership, with the team behind the scenes convinced of its future success.
Indeed, unlike so many smaller companies…
Kontrol is already using organic and acquired growth to move rapidly towards the $100 million a year revenue mark, has already established a stable of strong blue-chip clients, and has already fixed the cash flow it needs to fund blue-sky projects like BioCloud.
This all makes for a very attractive investment on a fundamental level.
So, with numerous potential catalysts on the horizon, today represents the ideal opportunity for smart investors to grab Kontrol with both hands.
Indeed, if they wait too long, they may very well find that this undiscovered gem has already entered the radar of mainstream investors…
IMPORTANT NOTICE AND DISCLAIMER
PAID ADVERTISEMENT
This communication is a paid advertisement. ValueTheMarkets is a trading name of Digitonic Ltd, and its owners, directors, officers, employees, affiliates, agents and assigns (collectively the “Publisher”) is often paid by one or more of the profiled companies or a third party to disseminate these types of communications. In this case, the Publisher has been compensated by Kontrol Technologies Corp. to conduct investor awareness advertising and marketing and has paid the Publisher the equivalent of one hundred sixty-six thousand US dollars to produce and disseminate this and other similar articles and certain related banner advertisements. This compensation should be viewed as a major conflict with the Publisher’s ability to provide unbiased information or opinion.
CHANGES IN SHARE TRADING AND PRICE
Readers should beware that third parties, profiled companies, and/or their affiliates may liquidate shares of the profiled companies at any time, including at or near the time you receive this communication, which has the potential to adversely affect share prices. Frequently companies profiled in our articles experience a large increase in share trading volume and share price during the course of investor awareness marketing, which often ends as soon as the investor awareness marketing ceases. The investor awareness marketing may be as brief as one day, after which a large decrease in share trading volume and share price may likely occur.
NO OFFER TO SELL OR BUY SECURITIES
This communication is not, and should not be construed to be, an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy any security.
INFORMATION
Neither this communication nor the Publisher purport to provide a complete analysis of any company or its financial position.
This communication is based on information generally available to the public and on an interview conducted with the company’s CEO, and does not contain any material, non public information. The information on which it is based is believed to be reliable. Nevertheless, the Publisher does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the information. Further, the information in this communication is not updated after publication and may become inaccurate or outdated. No reliance should be placed on the price or statistics information and no responsibility or liability is accepted for any error or inaccuracy. Any statements made should not be taken as an endorsement of analyst views.
NO FINANCIAL ADVICE
The Publisher is not, and does not purport to be, a broker-dealer or registered investment adviser or a financial adviser. The Publisher has no access to non-public information about publicly traded companies. The information provided is general and impersonal, and is not tailored to any particular individual’s financial situation or investment objective(s) and this communication is not, and should not be construed to be, personalized investment advice directed to or appropriate for any particular investor or a personal recommendation to deal or invest in any particular company or product. Any investment should be made only after consulting a professional investment advisor and only after reviewing the financial statements and other pertinent corporate information about the company. Further, readers are advised to read and carefully consider the Risk Factors identified and discussed in the advertised company’s SEC, SEDAR and/or other government filings. Investing in securities, particularly microcap securities, is speculative and carries a high degree of risk. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS
This communication contains forward-looking statements, including statements regarding expected continual growth of the featured companies and/or industry. Statements in this communication that look forward in time, which include everything other than historical information, are based on assumptions and estimates by our content providers and involve risks and uncertainties that may affect the profiled company’s actual results of operations. These statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other important factors that could cause the actual results and performance to differ materially from any future results or performance expressed or implied in the forward-looking statements. These risks, uncertainties and other factors include, among others: the success of the profiled company’s operations; the size and growth of the market for the company’s products and services; the company’s ability to fund its capital requirements in the near term and long term; pricing pressures; changes in business strategy, practices or customer relationships; general worldwide economic and business conditions; currency exchange and interest rate fluctuations; government, statutory, regulatory or administrative initiatives affecting the company’s business.
INDEMNIFICATION/RELEASE OF LIABILITY
By reading this communication, you acknowledge that you have read and understand this disclaimer in full, and agree and accept that the Publisher provides no warranty in respect of the communication or the profiled company and accepts no liability whatsoever. You acknowledge and accept this disclaimer and that, to the greatest extent permitted under applicable law, you release and hold harmless the Publisher from any and all liability, damages, injury and adverse consequences arising from your use of this communication. You further agree that you are solely responsible for any financial outcome related to or arising from your investment decisions.
All trademarks used in this communication are the property of their respective trademark holders. Other than valuethemarkets.com, the Publisher is not affiliated, connected, or associated with, and the communication is not sponsored, approved, or originated by, the trademark holders unless otherwise stated. No claim is made by the Publisher to any rights in any third-party trademarks other than valuethemarkets.com.
AUTHORS: VALUETHEMARKETS
valuethemarkets.com and Digitonic Ltd and our affiliates are not responsible for the content or accuracy of this article. The information included in this article is based solely on information provided by the company or companies mentioned above. This article does not provide any financial advice and is not a recommendation to deal in any securities or product. News and research are not recommendations to deal, and investments may fall in value so that you could lose some or all of your investment. Past performance is not an indicator of future performance.
ValueTheMarkets do not hold any position in the stock(s) and/or financial instrument(s) mentioned in the above piece. ValueTheMarkets have been paid to produce this piece by the company or companies mentioned above. Digitonic Ltd, the owner of valuethemarkets.com, has been paid for the production of this piece by the company or companies mentioned above.
By a show of hands, I.CON West keynote speaker Christine Cooper, Ph.D., managing director and chief U.S. economist with CoStar Group, polled attendees…
By a show of hands, I.CON West keynote speaker Christine Cooper, Ph.D.,managing director and chief U.S. economist with CoStar Group, polled attendees on their economic outlook – was it bright or bleak? The group responded largely positively, with most indicating they felt the economy was doing better than not.
Four years ago, the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a global pandemic, seemingly halting life as we knew it. And although those early days of the pandemic seem like a long time ago, we’re still in recovery from two of its major consequences: 1) the $4 trillion in economic stimulus that the U.S. government showered on consumers; and 2) the aggressive monetary policies that have created ripple effects on the industrial markets.
Cooper began with an overview of the economic environment, which she called “the good news.” The nation’s GDP is strong, and the economy gained momentum in the second half of 2023 – we saw economic growth of 4.9% and 3.2% in Q3 and Q4 respectively — much higher than expected. “The reason is consumers,” Cooper said. “When things get tough, we go shopping. This generates sales and economic activity. But how long can it last?”
Consumer sentiment continues to be healthy, and employment is good, although a shortage of workers could impact that moving forward. The U.S. added 275,000 jobs in January, far exceeding expectations. “The Fed raising interest rates hasn’t done what it normally does – slow job growth and the economy,” said Cooper. In addition, the $4 trillion given to keep households afloat during the pandemic has simply padded checking accounts, she said, as consumers couldn’t immediately spend the money because everyone was staying home, and the supply chain was clogged. The money was banked, and there’s still a lot of it to be spent.
Cooper addressed economic risks and the weak points that industrial real estate professionals should be mindful of right now, including mortgage rates that remain at 20-year highs, stalling the housing market, particularly for new home buyers. Mid-pandemic years of 2020-2021 had strong home sales, driven by people moving out of the city or roommates dividing into two properties for more space and protection against the virus. Homeowners who refinanced in the early stages of the pandemic were fortunate and aren’t willing to list their houses for sale quite yet.
“The housing market is a big driver of industrial demand – think furniture, appliances and all the durable goods that go into a home. This equates to warehouse space demand,” said Cooper.
Interest rates on consumer credit are spiking and leading economic indexes are still signaling a recession ahead. Financial markets are indicating the same, with a current probability of 61.5% that we will be in a recession by 2025. However, Cooper said, while all signs point to a recession, economists everywhere say the same thing as the economy seemingly continues to surprise us: “This time is different.”
Consumers are still holding the economy up with solid job and wage gains, yet higher borrowing costs are weighing on business activity and the housing market. Inflation has eased meaningfully but remains a bit too high for comfort. We’ve so far avoided the recession that everyone predicted, and the Federal Reserve appears ready to cut rates this year.
For the industrial markets, the good news is that retailer corporate profits are beginning to bounce back after slowing in 2021 and 2022, with retail sales accelerating.
A slowdown in industrial space absorption was reflected in all the key markets – Atlanta, Chicago, Columbus, Dallas-Fort Worth, Houston, the Inland Empire, Los Angeles, New Jersey and Phoenix – but was worst in the southern California markets, which have since been rebounding.
“Supply responded to strong demand,” Cooper said. “In 2021, 307 million square feet were delivered, followed by 395 million in 2022. In 2023, we saw 534 million square feet delivered – that’s almost 33% higher than the year before.”
The top 20 markets for 2023 deliveries measured by square feet are the expected hot spots: Dallas-Fort Worth (71 million square feet) leads the pack by almost double its follower of Chicago (37 million), then Houston (35 million), Phoenix (30 million) and Atlanta (29 million). Measured by share of inventory, emerging markets like Spartanburg, Pennsylvania, topped the list at 15 million square feet, followed by Austin (10 million), Phoenix and Dallas-Fort Worth (7 million), and Columbus (6 million).
“Developers are more focused on big box distribution projects, and 90% of what’s being delivered is 100,000 square feet or more,” Cooper said. Around 400 million square feet of space currently under construction is unleased, in addition to the around 400,000 square feet that remained unleased in 2023. “Putting supply and demand together, industrial vacancy rate is rising and could peak at 6-7% in 2024,” she said.
In conclusion, Cooper said that industrial real estate is rebalancing from its boom-and-bust years. Pandemic-related demands and accelerated e-commerce growth created a surge in 2021 and 2022, and the strong supply response that began in 2022 will continue to unfold through 2024. With rising interest rates putting a damper on demand in 2023, vacancies began to move higher and will continue to rise this year.
“Consumers are spending and will continue to do so, and interest rates are likely to fall this year,” said Cooper. “We can hope for a recovery from the full effects of the pandemic in 2025.”
This post is brought to you by JLL, the social media and conference blog sponsor of NAIOP’s I.CON West 2024. Learn more about JLL at www.us.jll.com or www.jll.ca.
Pharma and biotech’s top R&D spenders in 2023: a $153B total with M&A as a focus
At a time when biotech is still counting its losses as a thaw gradually sets in after the long market winter, pharma has been on a tear. M&A took off…
At a time when biotech is still counting its losses as a thaw gradually sets in after the long market winter, pharma has been on a tear. M&A took off in Q4 as the industry’s biggest R&D spenders either rolled the dice on the back of their blockbuster bonanzas, were forced to address gaping holes in the pipeline in the face of looming patent expirations, or simply had no choice in the face of repeated setbacks.
Bioregnum Opinion Column by John Carroll
For some, it was all of the above.
As a result, Merck flipped into the lead position generally occupied by Roche with an M&A-inflated expense line for research. The companies joined a hunt for new drugs frequently focused on Phase III; premiums are in — heavy preclinical risks are out of favor. The majors followed some well-worn paths into immunology and oncology. And 2024 kicked off with a new round of buyouts and licensing deals.
The sudden end of Covid as a vaccine, drug and diagnostic market left the likes of Pfizer scrambling to convince investors that they had an exciting new plan. (It’s not working so far.) Eli Lilly has become one of the most valuable companies on the planet as obesity drugs go mainstream. Leaders like Takeda kept upping the ante on the R&D budget as the numbers frayed, with all but Pfizer and Bristol Myers Squibb — two of the most deeply off-balance biopharmas — spending more in 2023. Across the board, we saw $153 billion accounted for in R&D budget lines for last year — which would have registered as a record even without the sudden bolus of spending at Merck.
New, promising drugs at biotechs aren’t getting cheaper. And some of the blockbusters pharma has to cover as the patent cliff approaches will demand multiple replacement franchises.
The Big 15 have the money, desire and need to do much, much more in R&D. And all signs indicate that we’ll see more through 2024.
Merck
Roche
J&J
Novartis
AstraZeneca
Pfizer
Eli Lilly
Bristol Myers Squibb
GSK
AbbVie
Sanofi
Gilead
Takeda
Amgen
Novo Nordisk
1. Merck: The BD team is remaking the pipeline, and they are moving fast
The big picture: Merck moved up to the top of the list this year by bundling a mother lode of M&A and drug licensing deals into the R&D expense line. Otherwise, the top slot would have gone to Roche, the traditional top title holder in the R&D 15.
Merck has been parlaying its unchallenged position as number one in the PD-1 game with Keytruda — a drug that earned $25 billion last year but will face a loss of exclusivity as patents start to expire in 2028 — into a host of big deals in 2023. Keytruda, meanwhile, has cruised to 39 approvals, leaving Bristol Myers’ Opdivo in its wake.
Too much commercial success, though, doesn’t translate into unending praise. Analysts had been grumbling for some time that Merck wasn’t doing enough to diversify its pipeline bets. But that’s been changing.
Merck tallied $5.5 billion upfront for its Daiichi Sankyo deal — picking up rights to three ADCs in the move — along with the across-the-slate hikes in costs for clinical programs, bigger payrolls and benefits. There was another charge for the $11.4 billion that went to buying Prometheus and Imago. Prometheus accounted for $10.8 billion of that — one of the biggest deals that followed the $11.5 billion Acceleron buyout in 2021. With $690 million in cash for a group of partners that includes Moderna, Orna and Orion.
Merck kicked off the new year with a $680 million buyout of Harpoon Therapeutics, underscoring its enduring interest in the oncology market. And it’s leaving no popular stone unturned, capturing attention with its expressed interest in GLP-1 combos as the next generation of weight loss drugs takes shape.
Merck CEO Rob Davis also recently made it clear that the pharma giant can afford more $1 billion-to-$15 billion deals, making it a top candidate for more deals in 2024.
Merck’s firepower on the deals side, though, is needed after some deep wrinkles marred the pipeline plan, like the FDA’s back-to-back CRLs for chronic cough drug gefapixant. The data, however, never matched up to Merck’s rhetoric. Failures in Alzheimer’s and depression underscored Merck’s traditional ill fortunes in neuro.
Merck has a few years to plan for its next big thing. They show every sign of remaining focused on the big prize ahead.
2. Roche: 2023 was a tough year. Will 2024 be any better on the R&D side?
The big picture: It’s not easy being Roche. The behemoth has long had a near-omnivorous approach to R&D, buying up and down the pipeline at all stages with a big appetite for oncology ahead of neuro, ophthalmology and immunology. This year, it’s had to contend with the elimination of its Covid revenue, once a big player on the diagnostics side as testing soared during the pandemic. They’ve had to lower investors’ expectations of 2024 sales to an embarrassingly modest level and saw their stock price slide.
It’s surprising they have any growth, given the corresponding knockoff competition building for Lucentis and Esbriet, but you can’t play with market expectations. They’ll kill you every time you’re off.
Roche found some silver linings in the Vabysmo franchise and they’ve been a significant player on the M&A side, scoring the Carmot buyout for $3 billion after bagging Telavant for $7.1 billion back in October, paying a price for something Pfizer all but gave away to Roivant. James Sabry and the BD team, meanwhile, have kept up their globetrotting ways, uncorking a slate of deals for JP Morgan.
Sabry moved to global BD chief at Roche after winning his spurs at Genentech, and he’s been in the game for quite a long time. His résumé includes a stint as a biotech CEO. He’s the doyen of dealmakers and isn’t sitting on the sidelines. Hope grows eternal at Roche, and to keep it growing, Sabry has to stay busy.
“We have in total 12 NMEs that could potentially transition into a Phase III during this year,” CEO Thomas Schinecker told analysts hopefully during their Q4 call.
On this scale, Roche tends to do things on a wholesale basis. So when execs recently unveiled a pipeline review, they mapped 146 programs covering 82 new molecular entities. That can be hard to keep up with. If raw numbers like that were a good indicator of future success, though, Roche wouldn’t have these troubles.
It’s less difficult to follow the culls. That includes a slate of neurology drugs, with several axed from the oncology area. The write-offs include the longtime disappointment crenezumab, which had been partnered with AC Immune in Alzheimer’s. Roche recently handed back crenezumab as well as semorinemab after working with AC Immune for close to an R&D generation. Some analysts gave up long ago.
We’ve also been hearing complaints about a lack of upcoming pivotal clinical data to arouse enthusiasm. But Roche has two big R&D groups at work trying to counter those impressions, with gRED (Genentech) and pRED (the traditional Roche research group) at bat. They now have a straight-up GLP-1/GIP drug in the clinic for obesity, with oral therapies in the works alongside many others. It may be late to the obesity game with the Carmot buyout, but Roche still sees opportunities worth paying for.
Execs are promising to play a better R&D game, prioritizing their best assets and piling on resources. But Roche has always been willing to invest heavily in R&D. Now the company needs to see some clinical cards fall its way. This has not been a patient market.
3. J&J: Under new management, J&J doubles down on the innovative side of R&D. Can they still surprise us?
The big picture: J&J typically has weighed in heavy on R&D, particularly if you add its medtech work to the total. Even after splitting that out, though, it’s still in the top five, hoovering up large numbers of early-stage licensing deals while occasionally nabbing something major in the $1 billion-plus category.
Last year the pharma giant punted its consumer division, following the footsteps of many major industry outfits, and shut down its work in infectious diseases and vaccines. RSV, a highly competitive field now, went out the window with a host of smaller programs and alliances. Its major fields of interest zero in on oncology, immunology, cardio and retinal disorders. And they chipped in close to $2 billion to join the ADC hunt in January with its acquisition of Ambrx.
J&J earned a rep for out-of-the-box thinking in oncology under former oncology R&D chief Peter Lebowitz, striking a deal with China’s Legend that delivered an approved drug — Carvykti — and following up with a $245 million pact to gain worldwide rights to another CAR-T from CBMG, a low-profile Chinese biotech that erupted into mainstream view with its Big Pharma deal.
Now the big questions about J&J focus on its new leadership after Joaquin Duato moved into the CEO’s role in 2022 and John Reed — leaping into his third Big Pharma R&D posting in 10 years, following Roche and Sanofi — takes command of the global R&D side of the company.
They have plenty of motivation to hustle up major new approvals. Stelara — raking in more than $10 billion a year — will see its patent protection erode in the US in 2025, with Europe moving first this year. That will take a few big wins to cover.
But J&J has been making big promises for years. Just a few months ago, it touted 20 drugs in the pipeline that could fuel 5% to 7% growth through 2030. One of the prime candidates is a drug they picked up from Protagonist: JNJ-2113, an IL-23 they believe can bring in blockbuster revenue in immunology. J&J, though, is likely far from done when it comes to new deals. Oncology R&D has been changing rapidly in the wake of the Inflation Reduction Act, with researchers moving up OS as a primary initial focus in Phase III. And it’s going to take a behemoth effort to deliver on these numbers, with likely failures and shortfalls along the way.
Don’t look for J&J to cut R&D anytime soon. They have a big agenda.
4. Novartis: Another streamlining move is wrapping up as Novartis vows to get back to basics in R&D — again
The big picture: Novartis CEO Vas Narasimhan has been crystal clear about the Big Pharma’s M&A strategy. He’s sticking with the industry sweet spot now in favor: picking up late-stage assets below the $5 billion range. A few weeks ago, that led Novartis to MorphoSys, where they have been partnered for years while distancing themselves from rumors of a pricey Cytokinetics play.
And it springs right off another $3 billion acquisition — for Chinook — that went straight to positive Phase III data for the kidney drug atrasentan, which likely wasn’t much of a surprise inside Novartis.
These days, Narasimhan and Novartis are all about focus. They want to make a deeper impact where they emphasize their priorities — cardio, immunology, neuroscience and oncology. And they also want to be leaders where they are centered, slashing oncology while emphasizing at every opportunity that they jumped out front in radioligands, now a hot commodity in R&D.
Lest anyone forget, Novartis was a pioneer in autologous CAR-T and has held on as it slowly works through all the challenges a cutting-edge technology can inspire.
Narasimhan had been five years before the mast as CEO, after being promoted from development chief, and he’s revising a pipeline strategy away from something he describes now as akin to everything everywhere all at once. Downsizing in 2023 was the big focus, dropping programs, reassigning scientists and promising a swifter pace — a never-ending problem in Big Pharma land. Narasimhan has also been pushing “seamlessness,” projecting a new era of cooperation among scientists and sales.
There’s nothing new about streamlining at Novartis, though. Narasimhan had a billion dollars of cuts in mind back in the spring of 2022. And periodically, the company has been well-known for going in and ironing out budgets. Changes have included an exit for development chief John Tsai, now a biotech CEO, who was replaced by Shreeram Aradhye. Fiona Marshall took the helm at NIBR in the fall of 2022, taking the place of Jay Bradner, who left and later wound up running R&D at Amgen.
The recent cleanup at Novartis included the end of the deal for BeiGene’s PD-1, an area that proved enormously frustrating to Novartis. Their TIGIT pact ended last summer. Phase II for GT005, a gene therapy it picked up in the $800 million Gyroscope buyout, didn’t end well. That program got the axe. And their anti-TGFß antibody, picked up in a small deal with Xoma nine years ago, failed after execs once billed it as a high-risk, high-reward play. Other setbacks include Adakveo, which faced global regulatory challenges following the failure of the Phase III confirmatory study. At the beginning of this year, there was a snafu in Phase III for ligelizumab, once billed as a top asset for peanut allergies.
Warning clouds have also formed around their top-selling drug Entresto, as Novartis fights a battle against the IRA and price negotiations.
The CEO, though, has been able to transition while the stock price was headed up, with a few big drugs driving revenue growth as a struggling Sandoz finally got the heave-ho in a spinout. Their franchise drug Kisqali, for example, is now billed as a $4 billion earner at the peak. As a result, their story has played well on Wall Street. Investors want to see the money and the trajectory. R&D follows sales in priority when it comes to the majors.
5. AstraZeneca: Pascal Soriot never takes defeat lying down. And that stubborn attitude has delivered big dividends as another big R&D test takes shape
The big picture: Back in 2018, AstraZeneca reported R&D expenses just under $6 billion. In the past five years, that big line item has grown 85%, and investors have seen the stock price grow 56%.
The R&D leaders at AstraZeneca have changed, but CEO Pascal Soriot has become a longtime fixture at the company. During his stint he took the weakest pipeline in biopharma and turned it into one of the strongest, building a slate of blockbuster oncology franchises while building a research machine based in Cambridge, UK, that consumes about $1 out of every $4 in revenue. He bet the ranch on Enhertu and won, with some analysts bullishly projecting peak sales that will break $10 billion. And he’s kept many of the promises he had to fire out to investors to keep an unwanted Pfizer takeover at bay in the way back when.
So what’s next?
That’s a question that’s vexing quite a few analysts. AstraZeneca is a restless player and the company takes a lot of chances — which means it racks up a lot of setbacks.
A major initiative aimed at protecting its revenue involves its legal fight against the IRA, which AstraZeneca has so far lost. Its next big ADC with Daiichi Sankyo, Dato-DXd, has sparked a running debate on its potential approval and some analysts have doubted if it can live up to the hype following weak PFS results for the TROP2 ADC. Last summer an early-stage GLP-1 went down in flames, unable to take the heat in a kitchen currently controlled by the commercial chefs at Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly. Lokelma, picked up in a 2015 buyout, got hit when R&D decided to quash two Phase III studies, denting once-big hopes for blockbuster status. And Soriot has recently been forced to finally give up on one old failure when he finally punted roxadustat’s US rights.
Soriot, though, is a weathered player when it comes to setbacks. Every loss is an opportunity to do better the next time, and no one can be more stubborn. You could see that play out over Covid when its vaccine came in for some undue criticism that blighted its impact in the face of the mRNA stars. That spurred some angry responses as execs dug in. But there was an unexpected upside. The giant didn’t have to readjust as the Covid market went pfffffft.
Their next step: A couple of months ago AstraZeneca touted its new vaccine platform, buying Icosavax for $838 million in cash while contributing an RSV vaccine to the pipeline — a field where GSK has made major headway — and a virus-like particle platform that the company intends to build on.
Volrustomig, a PD-1/CTLA-4 bispecific antibody, has been accelerated into Phase III, with Soriot claiming a leadership spot in bispecifics: “Our portfolio of bispecifics has the potential to replace the first-generation checkpoint inhibitors across a range of cancers.”
And that GLP-1 fail? Last November AstraZeneca paid $185 million to gain a Phase I GLP-1 drug out of China’s Eccogene. And now they’re mapping combo studies with some of their other drugs in a play at creating the next wave of obesity therapies with an edge.
Word in biopharma is that Soriot has been devoting a considerable amount of face time to China, where he committed the company years ago. That’s another one of those market promises that has seen plenty of ups and downs. But Soriot tends to win the big gambles more than he loses, and in this industry, seeing it through can be a major long-term advantage.
6. Pfizer: What the hell happened to the Covid king?
↑
R&D spending 2023: $10.57 billion
R&D spending 2022: $11.4 billion
Change: -7.3%
Revenue: $58.5 billion (down 42% from $100.3 billion)
The big picture: There was one brief, shining moment — or two — when Pfizer could seemingly do no wrong. It had taken a leading role in breaking through scientific barriers to create a new Covid vaccine in record time, harvested a bumper crop of cash and CEO Albert Bourla was the darling of the world’s favored pharma industry.
That was then.
Now, Bourla and his team are having a tough time convincing Wall Street that the company can do even simple things right. They paid $43 billion to bag Seagen and mount a major new campaign on the cancer front, but its stock has been blighted and the focus turned to cost-cutting as revenue plunged. There was fresh humiliation when Roivant flipped a drug it had grabbed from Pfizer for lunch money and sold it to Roche for $7.1 billion a year later. And Pfizer has lost the narrative in convincing investors it can get back to growth.
That somewhat hapless rep was burnished considerably when Pfizer reported that its first try at an oral GLP-1 obesity drug had flopped. It’s still working to move the dial in the hottest new field in pharma, but so is a long list of rivals. Instead of spurring renewed faith in Pfizer, the obesity play turned into another example of getting it wrong, and the focus at Pfizer shifted squarely to downsizing and cost-cutting in acknowledgment of the new reality that set in.
Bourla, though, is committed to pushing the story that a new period of growth lies ahead. And it’s not proving easy.
At the end of February, Pfizer made its best pitch for oncology, underscoring plans to seize the leadership role in genitourinary and breast cancer while making promises for eight-plus possible blockbusters in the next six years. R&D promises, though, are easy to make and hard to keep. Right now, the clarion call in pharma is “show me the money.”
With Covid and the mRNA revolution forgotten like last season’s hit show, there’s an enormous gap now that will be devilishly hard to bridge. But don’t expect anyone at Pfizer to stop trying anytime soon.
7. Eli Lilly: Built for the long term, Lilly’s day has arrived — and they don’t want to let go
The big picture: Historically, Eli Lilly has been known as a ponderously slow pharma outfit that often slowly cruised its way into Phase III squalls. But that view is so 2017. In 2024, Lilly has rebranded itself as the Big Pharma engine that could, and did, blow out expectations. And if it’s still not quite as nimble as some analysts might like, its ability to deliver in massively expensive late-stage studies for drugs aimed at big populations has made it a darling of quite the investor crowd.
Lilly, for example, was thwarted at getting an accelerated approval for its Alzheimer’s med, but that didn’t really cut expectations, with blockbuster peak sales projections — even as Biogen/Eisai’s Leqembi suffers from dimming prospects as their high hopes are lowered by the reality of limited sales in the face of limited efficacy.
That pales, though, in comparison to the bright rainbow that’s emerged in obesity. Lilly continues to work up manufacturing capacity to meet demand for its new obesity version of tirzepatide, the GLP-1/GIP drug building up the diabetes franchise, where neither of the two leaders has been able to meet a seemingly limitless demand.
Lilly attracted considerable attention for its vow to build out manufacturing capacity ahead of Phase III data for its next-gen oral version, orforglipron, while clearly so unhappy about Novo’s decision to muscle in and snap up Catalent that CEO Dave Ricks is grousing about the antitrust implications of their rival’s move. Lilly, though, has bragging rights to solid pivotal data in a market that is nowhere close to saturation point.
Like a lot of the big spenders on the list, Eli Lilly has been hunting new immunology drugs and plunked down $2.4 billion for Dice last summer. That was part of a full slate of acquisitions, including a pair of small ADC companies. Following yet another hot trend, there was a $1.4 billion deal for Point, which put them into radiopharmaceuticals.
Lilly nabbed two new drug approvals last year as it waited on the 2 big franchises in obesity and Alzheimer’s. That’s a testament to the progress that Dan Skovronsky spurred after the global player made him R&D chief 6 years ago. Eli Lilly execs still may not always be first, in an industry where first can be tremendously important to commercialization. But they’ve been right where it counts big in drug development, and it will take a therapeutic earthquake to alter that perception anytime in the near term.
8. Bristol Myers Squibb: A rough year spurs a cut in R&D spending and some major late-stage R&D deals
The big picture: This is a terrible time to try and explain why your Big Pharma company has structural issues that flattened or eroded sales revenue. Pfizer understands that and Bristol Myers got a bad taste of it as its shares slid 18% in the last year.
In both cases, the CEOs stepped up with a transition plan. The companies did some deals, but the late-stage stuff wasn’t cheap. And in Bristol Myers’ case, a new CEO was able to draw a line between its aging franchises and the new arrivals on the market, which saw some growth. The company line now: Just wait for the big pipeline hits to come and give us some time to weather the decline of these legacy drugs and you’ll love what you see.
Investors may not be cheering, but Bristol Myers’ stock did get some traction out of it in the last few weeks.
It was clear well before 2023 arrived that Bristol Myers understood it was facing some of those dreaded headwinds. That 2% drop in R&D spending highlighted the tight rein on spending for what remains a top 10 player in the pharma R&D world. Major figures in R&D, headed by Rupert Vessey, exited the company — in Vessey’s case, later making the flip to biotech at Flagship. And there was an unusual spat with Dragonfly after the pharma giant walked away from its $650 million investment.
New CEO Chris Boerner spotlighted the immediate strategy at hand: M&A. Mirati and KRAS came their way for $5.8 billion. RayzeBio happily landed a premium on top of the premium they had just scored in an IPO, as Bristol Myers followed rivals into radiopharmaceuticals. The $14 billion Karuna buyout put them into a late-stage race on Alzheimer’s, another R&D category that’s been enjoying a renaissance some years after pharma fled the scene.
Boerner’s bottom line in the Q4 review is that the company will steer more into bolt-on plays — rather than big buyouts — and licensing deals like the SystImmune alliance. That sets the stage for a “transition” period that will last until 2028, four long years ahead, when it’s promising “top-tier” results. It will also be looking at lower-priced competition for Opdivo.
Even before 2028, though, BMS will start losing patent protection on Eliquis. They’ve already begun price negotiations with Medicare. And Eliquis earned $12.2 billion in 2022, making it their number-one franchise. That’s left Bristol Myers and Pfizer, both under huge pressure to perform and do more late-stage deals, backing a full-court press in the courts to keep generics at bay.
Bristol Myers has had an active dealmaking arm for years, including in the wake of its big $74 billion buyout of Celgene, which also delivered Vessey to the pharma giant. That was just five years ago after Celgene had fallen on some troubled times. Celgene had been a standout in the licensing field, known for sampling a wide variety of drug plays in the industry pipeline. One of Bristol’s big failures, though, was ceding the high ground in PD-1 to Merck’s Keytruda, which has been buoying its rival for years. Bristol needs major drug franchises to make a difference in this world, and any future setbacks on the leading drugs it’s been buying now will not be welcome by investors.
There is a path forward for Bristol, of course, even as it vows to pay down debt. But it’s fairly narrow, and this field is known for some treacherous results.
9. GSK: After picking up some badly-needed revenue steam, what’s next for R&D?
The big picture: Tony Wood is still shy of his second anniversary as the CSO at GSK, but with an RSV vaccine riding high as a new blockbuster franchise and Shingrix looking every bit the long-distance franchise player GSK needs, he has a reassuring revenue foundation to work with. ViiV’s steady work in HIV — where GSK is a majority owner — also offers a confidence-building revenue stream. And the departure of the consumer unit is well into the rearview mirror now.
Its stock has done well, too, up 28% in the past year.
That’s quite a changed picture from the early days of his predecessor, Hal Barron, who came in with deep oncology experience and a big need to demonstrate a broad-based pipeline reorganization to overcome a well-earned rep for underperformance. Wood’s first moves in R&D were largely defensive, giving up some major alliances — such as a partnership with Adaptimmune — that looked shaky.
GSK has made a lot of early bets, and the risks involved naturally portend that many of its deals won’t survive. You can see that in play right through its recent decision to dump a pair of Vir partnerships in infectious diseases.
In their place, GSK has been inking major new development deals with the likes of China’s Hansoh, for ADCs. Oncology, though, is still only a small performer overall. And it’s been a focus for a while.
GSK spent a billion dollars upfront to bag a mid-stage asthma drug at Aiolos in a rare M&A deal. There was also the $2 billion Bellus buyout last fall, with an eye to creating a new franchise for chronic cough. But there’s been a notable absence of any splashy deals at GSK, with a reorg in research that offers GSK’s latest take on improving efficiency.
We’ll see how that goes.
In the meantime, GSK is doing what it can to stir up some excitement for late-stage drugs like depemokimab (again in asthma), camlipixant (from Bellus) as well as the antibiotic gepotidacin for UTIs/gonorrhea. It’s an uphill fight, though, without much megablockbuster razzmatazz built in. But GSK is a careful player.
After getting stuck with the rep for having one of the worst pipelines in pharma, though, reliable and steady progress with a high-profile launch in RSV will suit just fine. At least for now. It’s likely that investors will keep pressing for something big in Phase III, and that could cost CEO Emma Walmsley a considerable amount of BD money.
10. AbbVie: The slow-motion collapse of Humira keeps them focused on the bottom line while growing R&D spending
The big picture: As Rick Gonzalez finishes his final run as CEO, he’s able to look back on a year that saw AbbVie complete its revamp period as the long-awaited — long, long-awaited — arrival of generic Humira bites into its old cash cow.
The great split at Abbott that created AbbVie set up a scenario where the company would pull out every stop to milk Humira for every conceivable dollar possible, delivering mega-returns while Gonzalez became the poster child of patent reform. The bottom line for AbbVie’s team: What’s repeated waves of congressional criticism with the stock price on the line?
Now AbbVie is able to boost expected revenue on the two big drugs developed on Gonzalez’s watch — Skyrizi and Rinvoq — with two new acquisitions to feed future sales projections. The buyout of Botox created a new, highly reliable franchise for AbbVie’s commercial team to lean on.
AbbVie is skilled at acquiring and building revenue. It had its eyes set on the ADC drug Elahere when it acquired ImmunoGen for $10 billion. Initially approved in 2022 for ovarian cancer, the drug is now being positioned for earlier lines of therapy.
Less than a week after the ImmunoGen deal was announced, AbbVie was back for a late-stage acquisition with the $8.7 billion for Cerevel’s neuro play. The deal will bring in clinical-stage assets for schizophrenia, Parkinson’s and dementia, as CNS moves back into a warmer phase in Wall Street circles. Both buyouts underscore Big Pharma’s considerable appetite for new products, with premiums in play for de-risked drug programs.
Gonzalez’s departure barely caused a murmur on the markets, which is a testament to his success in delivering for shareholders a secure, long-term rebuild. His legacy is a company with a ruthless rep for shepherding drug revenue while building a big interest in curtailing patents for pharma. But looking only at the numbers, he proved the winner at the company as the game was played during his tenure.
11. Sanofi: Paul Hudson is still out to make a great first impression in R&D
The big picture: When Paul Hudson showed up in San Francisco for JP Morgan in January, ready to talk up plans for the road ahead, he noted: “It feels like a lot longer than four years that we’ve been on this journey.”
But Hudson has always been more comfortable sounding like a newly-coined CEO, plotting a turnaround. And in the last few months, he’s played every card in that deck. The announcement late last year that Sanofi is bumping its R&D budget is central to that theme, though the news of its impact on profitability led to a rout of the stock price. And he delights in spotlighting late-stage assets, even though a slate of his early bets failed or have yet to prove themselves.
In what is now standard in pharma, Hudson made what he could out of the news he was spinning out the consumer division. Again, though, investors were less than thrilled by the gambit.
This time around the PR track, Hudson has boasting rights to the recently approved RSV drug Beyfortus, which comes with some big peak sales projections from Jefferies and much, much less from others. We’ll know soon enough if this is a winner or the latest disappointment at Sanofi. And, as always, there’s the Sanofi touchstone: Its megablockbuster Dupixent, which the pharma giant was able to partner on with Regeneron years ago — keeping the franchise fresh and expanding. Dupixent is the cash cow that gives Sanofi the financial strength needed to move ahead.
And that means there’s capacity for more dealmaking.
Not long after the San Francisco appearance, Hudson followed up on his M&A assurances with a $1.7 billion drug buyout, carving out a Phase II drug for a rare disease called alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency, or AATD. It fits right into the zone for 2024, where pharma can only get positive attention for something within sight of an approval.
Like others on this list, Sanofi’s R&D rep will ultimately rest on its ability to deliver on the 12 would-be blockbusters the company is betting on. That includes three “products in a pipeline“: amlitelimab, frexalimab and SAR441566 (oral TNFR1si). They’re followed by tolebrutinib, lunsekimig, rilzabrutinib, an anti-TL1A in IBD, an IRAK4 degrader and itepekimab for COPD.
Behind it all, Hudson has also been promising to make Sanofi a leader in AI-assisted pharma operations. Sanofi, though, has been promising a makeover in innovation for well over a decade and has done nothing to prove it’s worked beyond staying on track with the megablockbuster it got from Regeneron. One breakout franchise delivered on Hudson’s watch would change that in a heartbeat.
We’re waiting.
12. Gilead: The CEO gambled on big innovation — and often lost. But the wagers keep coming
The big picture: Daniel O’Day jumped into the CEO job at Gilead five years ago and hit the ground running. He hasn’t stopped, even though some of his biggest bets have run into brick walls.
That was apparent weeks ago with the news that Gilead would ice its work on blood cancer involving magrolimab, the CD47 drug picked up in a $5 billion buyout back in 2020. Their mid-stage work on solid tumors ground to a halt shortly after.
Rehashing and refocusing their deal with Arcus, putting in significantly more money while axing one of the Phase IIIs, didn’t help.
Gilead’s rep was built around HIV, where it has remained dominant, though more than a bit taken for granted. The old regime’s follow-up — after a cloudburst of cash for curing hep C that quickly dried up — was to buy out Kite and take a pioneering position in CAR-T, which hasn’t lived up to the financial hype that attended its arrival, despite the clear scientific innovation it brought to the field.
The stock was hammered hard in January after Trodelvy — acquired in the 2020 Immunomedics buyout, which achieved blockbuster status last year — failed a Phase III in second-line lung cancer.
But when you raise doubts and see your stock sinking, counter with a late-stage buyout. That’s clearly what O’Day had in mind when he plunked down more than $4 billion to buy CymaBay after the biotech unveiled late-stage data on seladelpar. Gilead bought a would-be blockbuster with a PDUFA date. And that’s a sign of some desperation at a company that badly needs a breakout.
13. Takeda: Moving up another notch on the top 15, as profitability wobbles, Takeda execs are still reaching for the golden ring in R&D
The big picture: Takeda has been aggressively taking chances in R&D right from the time CEO Christophe Weber and R&D chief Andy Plump teamed up to remake the aging Japanese pharma company into a global drug player back in 2015. That meant steadily upping the ante in R&D — now up another slot in this year’s rankings — and investing in deals like the Shire buyout, which gave Plump his base in the Cambridge/Boston hub, along with a big stake in rare diseases.
For Takeda, that mission meant a broad effort to develop a major pipeline, from collaborations through Phase III. More recently, it’s been about concentrating their new work around a pair of key deals, particularly the $4 billion acquisition of Nimbus’ TYK2. It likely wasn’t much of a surprise, but their drug — which also has a $2 billion rider for milestones — cleared a Phase IIb hurdle in psoriatic arthritis.
For Takeda, it’s a clear indication of just how popular it is these days for pharma players to zero in on late-stage therapies in search of relatively near-term approvals.
Want more evidence of that?
Takeda bet $400 million in cash and more than a billion dollars in milestones to gain rights to Hutchmed’s fruquintinib and then was rewarded with an approval for treatment-naive cases of colorectal cancer in the fall. And they demonstrated its continued appetite in the rare disease space with the recent $300 million deal for Protagonist’s late-stage drug rusfertide, designed to treat a rare blood disease called polycythemia vera (PV).
The risks it’s taken on have been readily apparent to Takeda’s leaders, with its decision to drop Exkivity after flunking the Phase III NSCLC confirmatory trial, a Phase II fail for its key metachromatic leukodystrophy program, as well as a decision to drop Theravance as a partner after a seven-year alliance. The late-stage setbacks cost Takeda a $770 million write-down. Add in a loss of exclusivity for Vyvanse in 2023 — a $3 billion blockbuster in fiscal 2022 — and you have the outlines of unsteady performance for the pharma player, with Weber promising to do better in the near term.
Takeda is unusual in the Big Pharma world for winding up its fiscal year at the end of March. In order to do an apples-to-apples comparison, they prepared a summary of their R&D expenses and revenue for all of 2023 for Endpoints News.
14. Amgen: Capitalizing on a history of striking high-profile deals, Amgen stays in the spotlight
The big picture: Amgen is a considerable distance from spending on research like the top 10 players in our R&D 15, but it frequently finds ways to box competitively in the biggest heavyweight category. It had done that with KRAS, taking a legit scientific advance that couldn’t quickly move the dial in a major way on the commercial side. That happens a lot in oncology. And now it’s in the spotlight with an obesity drug — branded as MariTide now — with hopes to take on the likes of Eli Lilly and Novo Nordisk.
The chutzpah originates with longtime CEO Bob Bradway, who has parlayed his Wall Street cred as a former banker at Morgan Stanley into major league status with a savvy understanding of the numbers and investors. He skillfully navigated the $28 billion Horizon buyout last year, bagging a lineup of commercial therapies as the company looks for the approaching patent cliff on Enbrel, a reliable blockbuster that has kept the revenue flowing in.
Amgen may not do a lot in M&A or Phase III, but what it does do, it does with style.
To complete the Horizon deal, Bradway had to orchestrate a deal with the FTC to skirt its objections to price bundling, which essentially leaves the pharma company on commercial probation with regular reporting to the federal agency. That took skill and boldness while maintaining the CEO’s rep for delivering on the bottom line. Its stock is up 18% over the past year.
Analysts will be watching carefully to see how Jay Bradner does in the top R&D post after the Harvard prof-and-former-NIBR chief assumes the seat of David Reese, now chief technology officer. Reese seems truly energized in his new role heading up tech, and Bradner is a die-hard research enthusiast who loves nothing better than jumping into conversations about the details of target degeneration.
Amgen is all about message.
15. Novo Nordisk: The longtime diabetes franchise player has a breakout run going in obesity — with vows to stay in front
The big picture: R&D spending as a percentage of sales has edged up a bit in the last few years, but the key driver here is GLP-1, where Novo has capitalized on its first-in-class leadership position in obesity. After decades spent in the shadow of chronic R&D failure, safety issues and a recent swarm of largely ineffective drugs, the obesity field is crushing it. That has swelled sales revenue as semaglutide glowed, so Novo’s research spending has boomed at a fast pace.
Now that the good times are rolling, and Novo already has a well-earned rep as a realistic and committed player in diabetes, which didn’t come cheap or easy, the new player on the R&D 15 is promising to stay out front — no easy task with Eli Lilly gunning for it. Novo has been snapping up new obesity tech at a furious pace, determined to stay out front.
Its one limiting factor here has been manufacturing capacity. Novo can’t satisfy the demand for a drug that is now a staple of public conversation, as the field gets a boost from a wide range of celebrities, including Oprah Winfrey. That’s marketing you could buy, but don’t have to. It’s coming for free.
With uncharacteristic bravado, Novo doubled down by striking a deal to acquire the global CDMO giant Catalent for $16.5 billion, and Lilly has been fuming about the antitrust aspects as CEO Dave Ricks complains that worldwide manufacturing capacity has either been maxed out or is not easily converted from its existing uses.
Novo’s commitment to growing R&D has international implications that far exceed the limits of its home country of Denmark, extending to hubs in Oxford, Seattle and Beijing. Most recently, Novo has committed to boosting its Boston-area research hub. And it’s likely to remain a key player in its dominant fields — unless some other tech can topple the megablockbuster that is remaking this company.
Novo may be at the end of this list in terms of R&D spending, but it has overachieved with its success for semaglutide. It has the capacity to do more and should continue to climb for several years to come as it makes a case for continued growth.
Postscript: Regeneron, with $4.44 billion in research spending — up 23% over $3.6 billion in 2022 — deserves an honorable mention in the competitive 16th spot. This year, Regeneron expects R&D spending to top up at or close to $5 billion. The company’s value has swollen on the success of its high-profile founders, Len Schleifer and George Yancopoulos, who continue to build the company — hitting a market cap in excess of $100 billion with the stock up 29% over the past year. Regeneron will likely find its way into the top 15 at some point, and we’ll be watching for it.
Chronic stress and inflammation linked to societal and environmental impacts in new study
From anxiety about the state of the world to ongoing waves of Covid-19, the stresses we face can seem relentless and even overwhelming. Worse, these stressors…
From anxiety about the state of the world to ongoing waves of Covid-19, the stresses we face can seem relentless and even overwhelming. Worse, these stressors can cause chronic inflammation in our bodies. Chronic inflammation is linked to serious conditions such as cardiovascular disease and cancer – and may also affect our thinking and behavior.
Credit: Image: Vodovotz et al/Frontiers
From anxiety about the state of the world to ongoing waves of Covid-19, the stresses we face can seem relentless and even overwhelming. Worse, these stressors can cause chronic inflammation in our bodies. Chronic inflammation is linked to serious conditions such as cardiovascular disease and cancer – and may also affect our thinking and behavior.
A new hypothesis published in Frontiers in Science suggests the negative impacts may extend far further.
“We propose that stress, inflammation, and consequently impaired cognition in individuals can scale up to communities and populations,” explained lead author Prof Yoram Vodovotz of the University of Pittsburgh, USA.
“This could affect the decision-making and behavior of entire societies, impair our cognitive ability to address complex issues like climate change, social unrest, and infectious disease – and ultimately lead to a self-sustaining cycle of societal dysfunction and environmental degradation,” he added.
Bodily inflammation ‘mapped’ in the brain
One central premise to the hypothesis is an association between chronic inflammation and cognitive dysfunction.
“The cause of this well-known phenomenon is not currently known,” said Vodovotz. “We propose a mechanism, which we call the ‘central inflammation map’.”
The authors’ novel idea is that the brain creates its own copy of bodily inflammation. Normally, this inflammation map allows the brain to manage the inflammatory response and promote healing.
When inflammation is high or chronic, however, the response goes awry and can damage healthy tissues and organs. The authors suggest the inflammation map could similarly harm the brain and impair cognition, emotion, and behavior.
Accelerated spread of stress and inflammation online
A second premise is the spread of chronic inflammation from individuals to populations.
“While inflammation is not contagious per se, it could still spread via the transmission of stress among people,” explained Vodovotz.
The authors further suggest that stress is being transmitted faster than ever before, through social media and other digital communications.
“People are constantly bombarded with high levels of distressing information, be it the news, negative online comments, or a feeling of inadequacy when viewing social media feeds,” said Vodovotz. “We hypothesize that this new dimension of human experience, from which it is difficult to escape, is driving stress, chronic inflammation, and cognitive impairment across global societies.”
Inflammation as a driver of social and planetary disruption
These ideas shift our view of inflammation as a biological process restricted to an individual. Instead, the authors see it as a multiscale process linking molecular, cellular, and physiological interactions in each of us to altered decision-making and behavior in populations – and ultimately to large-scale societal and environmental impacts.
“Stress-impaired judgment could explain the chaotic and counter-intuitive responses of large parts of the global population to stressful events such as climate change and the Covid-19 pandemic,” explained Vodovotz.
“An inability to address these and other stressors may propagate a self-fulfilling sense of pervasive danger, causing further stress, inflammation, and impaired cognition in a runaway, positive feedback loop,” he added.
The fact that current levels of global stress have not led to widespread societal disorder could indicate an equally strong stabilizing effect from “controllers” such as trust in laws, science, and multinational organizations like the United Nations.
“However, societal norms and institutions are increasingly being questioned, at times rightly so as relics of a foregone era,” said Prof Paul Verschure of Radboud University, the Netherlands, and a co-author of the article. “The challenge today is how we can ward off a new adversarial era of instability due to global stress caused by a multi-scale combination of geopolitical fragmentation, conflicts, and ecological collapse amplified by existential angst, cognitive overload, and runaway disinformation.”
Reducing social media exposure as part of the solution
The authors developed a mathematical model to test their ideas and explore ways to reduce stress and build resilience.
“Preliminary results highlight the need for interventions at multiple levels and scales,” commented co-author Prof Julia Arciero of Indiana University, USA.
“While anti-inflammatory drugs are sometimes used to treat medical conditions associated with inflammation, we do not believe these are the whole answer for individuals,” said Dr David Katz, co-author and a specialist in preventive and lifestyle medicine based in the US. “Lifestyle changes such as healthy nutrition, exercise, and reducing exposure to stressful online content could also be important.”
“The dawning new era of precision and personalized therapeutics could also offer enormous potential,” he added.
At the societal level, the authors suggest creating calm public spaces and providing education on the norms and institutions that keep our societies stable and functioning.
“While our ‘inflammation map’ hypothesis and corresponding mathematical model are a start, a coordinated and interdisciplinary research effort is needed to define interventions that would improve the lives of individuals and the resilience of communities to stress. We hope our article stimulates scientists around the world to take up this challenge,” Vodovotz concluded.
The article is part of the Frontiers in Science multimedia article hub ‘A multiscale map of inflammatory stress’. The hub features a video, an explainer, a version of the article written for kids, and an editorial, viewpoints, and policy outlook from other eminent experts: Prof David Almeida (Penn State University, USA), Prof Pietro Ghezzi (University of Urbino Carlo Bo, Italy), and Dr Ioannis P Androulakis (Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, USA).
Journal
Frontiers in Science
DOI
10.3389/1239462
Method of Research
Computational simulation/modeling
Subject of Research
Not applicable
Article Title
A multiscale inflammatory map: linking individual stress to societal dysfunction
Article Publication Date
12-Mar-2024
COI Statement
YV is a cofounder of, and stakeholder in, Immunetrics, Inc. and a consultant to Anuna AI. PFMJV is the founder of, and stakeholder in, Eodyne Systems s.l. and Sapiens5 Holding BV. DLK was employed by Tangelo – Intend, Inc. Neither these companies nor the funders mentioned above were involved in the study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation of data, the writing of this article, or the decision to submit it for publication. The companies mentioned above also did not provide funding for the study. The remaining author declares that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. The authors YV and PV declared that they are editorial board members of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision.
We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking “Accept”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously.
Cookie
Duration
Description
cookielawinfo-checbox-analytics
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checbox-functional
11 months
The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checbox-others
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
viewed_cookie_policy
11 months
The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.
Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.