Connect with us

International

Who’s spending and who’s cutting from Big Pharma’s $127B R&D budget? Here are the top 15 players

A couple of the Big 15 biopharma companies in R&D hit the gas on research spending last year. Merck and Sanofi still have lots to prove in the pipeline,…

Published

on

A couple of the Big 15 biopharma companies in R&D hit the gas on research spending last year. Merck and Sanofi still have lots to prove in the pipeline, and they’re willing to gamble large sums to make a better future for themselves.

Doing nothing would be infinitely worse.

But collectively, the top players rang up a modest 2.4% increase in spending in 2022, which didn’t cover inflationary pressures. And that set the tone for an extraordinarily cautious year for the industry — even as it laid out about $127 billion to advance new drugs or up the ante on approved therapies.

The cautious theme has been on display in all the most important research categories. Big Pharma is shying away from early-stage risk and moving more of its focus to clearly pivotal data or simply commercial products that have been almost completely de-risked. They can depend on their bread-and-butter core expertise in marketing to keep the money flowing from these products, while several are retooling priorities in the wake of the IRA — the first serious pricing policy to hit in their careers.

Q1 2023 has highlighted all those trends with a vengeance. The shift to value is clear at every end of the R&D process, and for experimental drugs, the only value consideration that means much of anything is Phase II or III data. Risk and long development timelines are anathema, though plenty are still willing to take on discovery projects with relatively small upfronts and big back ends.

Bold, expensive discovery bets are out of favor; winkling out cost savings in R&D is in.

On the discount lane, you’ll find all the talk — even from proven performers who have great track records. You can imagine how all the rest are treated.

Curiously, all these top spenders have solid reason to try something dramatic as gaps appear in their 2025 and 2026 approval timelines. But M&A isn’t pointed toward big plays about emerging drug targets — even though the science arguably is better and more ambitious than ever.

The Endpoints R&D 15
  • Roche
  • Merck
  • Pfizer
  • J&J
  • AstraZeneca
  • Bristol Myers Squibb
  • Novartis
  • Eli Lilly
  • Sanofi
  • GSK
  • AbbVie
  • Gilead
  • Takeda
  • Amgen
  • Regeneron

Severin Schwan

  • R&D spending 2022: 14.1 billion CHF ($15.2 billion)
  • R&D spending 2021: 13.7 billion CHF ($14.8 billion)
  • R&D as a percentage of spending: 29%
  • Change: +3%
  • Sales revenue: 63.3 billion CHF
  • R&D chiefs:
  • Head of gRED: Aviv Regev
  • Head of pRED: Hans Clevers

1. Roche: The late-stage R&D theme sours at Roche. Can they still do something big?

The big picture: Over the past year, quite a few investors have pinned their hopes for Roche on two drugs: gantenerumab, in the latest burst of enthusiasm for Alzheimer’s, and oversized expectations for TIGIT in I/O.

That, um, didn’t work out so well.

Gantenerumab is now a three-time loser in its category and Roche helped dim the bulb considerably with back-to-back disappointments on TIGIT.

Now there’s a reassessment underway, with some growing skepticism over what’s next in the pipeline to get things revved up again.

It didn’t help that Roche recently wrote down $3 billion on acquired assets and executed a Q4 cull that took down the AKT inhibitor ipatasertib after multiple disappointments — among other things. To be sure, there’s been plenty of portfolio drug advances over the past year, but it hasn’t changed the overall sour theme.


Rob Davis

  • R&D spending 2022: $13.55 billion
  • R&D spending 2021: $12.24 billion
  • Change: Up 11%
  • Sales revenue: $59.2 billion
  • R&D as a percentage of spending: 23%
  • R&D chief: Dean Li
  • Ticker: $MRK

2. Merck: Enormous success with King Keytruda keeps the critics — and company execs — looking for the next big thing

The big picture: At Merck, there’s Keytruda and then there’s everything else, which tends to pale in comparison. And its enormous success is creating a bit of a dilemma, as analysts ask — and keep asking — what the company will profit from in the future.

Last year, the PD-1 king registered close to $21 billion in annual sales — 35% of Merck’s total — continuing its years-long romp over Bristol Myers Squibb. But the franchise has been showing some wear and tear recently, as its most recent round of I/O combo trials has turned up repeated instances of clinical failures. Most recently, a TIGIT tie-up turned out poor data, which didn’t do anything for Merck or that field.

R&D chief Dean Li has put a circle around cardio, though, hoping for a near-term approval for sotatercept as execs talk up the potential of a new R&D segment outside the oncology legacy left by Ken Frazier and Roger Perlmutter. The $11.5 billion buyout for Acceleron by the new management team helped underscore Merck’s promise to go big in M&A, but they missed the Seagen buyout, leaving the focus on smaller bolt-ons more concentrated on individual therapies than fast market growth.

Will that cut it? Merck will have to do something impressive, and the theme this year is paying a big premium for near or now revenue growth.

Their Covid treatment Lagevrio (molnupiravir), helped boost revenue to a 22% growth rate last year. But that was ephemeral. The durable franchises remain Lynparza, partnered with AstraZeneca, along with Lenvima as well as Gardasil for HPV. But the analysts are proving a tough crowd, with plenty of concern about patent protection and too few eggs in too few baskets.


Albert Bourla

  • R&D spending 2022: $12.4 billion
  • R&D spending 2021: $13.8 billion
  • R&D as a percentage of spending: 12.3%
  • Change: -10%
  • Sales revenue: $100.3 billion, up from $81.2 billion
  • R&D chief: Mikael Dolsten
  • Ticker: $PFE

3. Pfizer: It was good to be the Covid king, now a big buyout will help keep them on top in 2023 and beyond

The big picture: After years as the ponderous giant, making often silly and slow moves in R&D and tempting fate with patent expirations, Pfizer has shown some stylish moves in recent years. Its alliance with BioNTech put them on the cutting edge of mRNA and gave Pfizer an overnight fortune, while the receding tide of the pandemic has exposed some underlying weaknesses.

That set the stage for Pfizer’s $43 billion acquisition of Seagen, where they can buy an existing set of products and pipeline projects from the resurgent biotech. It’s a good use of the Covid windfall, but nobody thinks they got a bargain. These days, you pay a premium for cash flow, and Pfizer has the marketing chops to make sure they can keep these products performing at a high level.

Pfizer’s classic internal issues with R&D have hamstrung the major league player for years, but now it’s right in the thick of things with a new RSV vaccine, as a foot race to the first FDA approvals takes shape. That’s a switch. And they can continue to do deals, beefing up both their pipeline as well as their commercial portfolio.

Was it luck or skill? Probably quite a bit of both. And with a worldwide manufacturing reach combined with impressive commercial capabilities, Pfizer is positioned to capitalize on its progress.


Joaquin Duato

  • R&D spending 2022: $11.6 billion (pharma)
  • R&D spending 2021: $11.9 billion (pharma)
  • R&D as a percentage of spending: 22%
  • Change: -2.5%
  • Sales revenue: $52.5 billion (pharma)
  • R&D chief: John Reed
  • Ticker: $JNJ

4. J&J: The C-suite is operational, but where are its next big contenders?

The big picture: We always break out pharma R&D spend for J&J to keep this an apples-to-apples comparison and will continue to do so until J&J goes the way of all Big Pharma and jumps out of consumer health in the near future. J&J has been a huge conglomerate, and its top-five ranking highlights its promises to investors for a landmark slate of big approvals in the coming years.

That’s not going to be easy to pull off, especially after research chief Mathai Mammen slipped out the door to throw his hat into the ring for other posts while John Reed eventually stepped in following five-year stints at Roche and Sanofi.

Despite the changes at the top, including Joaquin Duato’s move into the CEO post, J&J’s R&D group is like a cruise ship — massive, busy and always threatened by shifting and unreliable currents and events. Taking that and instilling confidence in top prospects and deals is a necessary part of filling the cabins and keeping the support of Wall Street, but they have to make more bets if they reasonably expect to stay on course.

On deck are some major franchises like Darzalex and Tremfya, with Carvykti and Tecvayli moving up as Stelara sales hit the skids. Big efforts like Remicade are sliding south and pharma sales are eroding, putting the focus back on R&D and doing some strategic deals — and you can bet they will look for some big players that can provide late-stage promise of blockbuster sales.

How long can they wait on that front?

Always ready to strike a pose, J&J has been reluctant to specify the cuts being made to their global R&D ops. Like Bristol Myers Squibb and others, J&J’s media strategy is to boast about growth — real and projected — and downplay the layoffs and any discussion about failure.


Pascal Soriot

  • R&D spending 2022: $9.76 billion
  • R&D spending 2021: $9.73 billion
  • R&D as a percentage of spending: 22%
  • Change: Flat
  • Sales revenue: $43 billion
  • R&D chiefs: Mene Pangalos and Susan Galbraith

5. AstraZeneca: Pascal Soriot has delivered on his promise on performance. So maybe it’s a good time for a few pleasant surprises

The big picture: It may have taken a while, with a large number of setbacks in the beginning. But a steadfast approach to R&D and a deal to buy Alexion has vaulted AstraZeneca into the top five, where it promises to remain in the back of some durable — and growing — drug franchises.

Even the company’s long-promised and way-over-budget HQ building is wrapping up, demonstrating a tenacity that is rarely seen in Big Pharma.

Much of AstraZeneca’s success stays focused around Soriot’s aggressive approach to pushing drugs like Lynparza and Tagrisso and, more recently, Enhertu — a legacy of the short but brilliant run by the late Jose Baselga. Through it all, Mene Pangalos has kept up his end of the deal, laying out a clearly focused R&D strategy that has delivered more consistent successes in the pipeline. And Susan Galbraith’s step up from the discovery end into the senior research post in oncology has paid off with her seemingly inexhaustible enthusiasm for the next wave in cancer drugs.

Ironically, changes in the Chinese market have benefited and hurt AstraZeneca. The Chinese government got more aggressive on pricing, biting into the revenue the global player had received, while the FDA’s new stance on China-only data has pushed back competition from EQRx, which also dropped its deep-discount approach to fielding new drugs.

Steady performance, good prospects, delivering real value and promising data for franchise ops, it’s frankly a bit boring. There will be setbacks (such as the rollout of its Covid vaccine), but the long years of failure and underperformance that made AstraZeneca into a basket case are a closed chapter.

AstraZeneca can afford to take some chances now without hurting its rep. And that could offer a few surprises yet.


Giovanni Caforio

  • R&D spending 2022: $9.5 billion
  • R&D spending 2021: $10.2 billion
  • Change: -7%
  • R&D as a percentage of spending: 20%
  • Sales revenue: $46.2 billion
  • CMO: Samit Hirawat (Rupert Vessey left recently)
  • Ticker: $BMY

6. Bristol Myers Squibb: The uneasy giant looks to break out of a slump

The big picture: The one question no one wants to answer at Bristol Myers right now revolves around the rumblings inside the R&D group. Rupert Vessey, the square-jawed commander brought in from Celgene, had kept a host of partnerships alive and kicking. But with the IRA biting and revenue flat, Vessey recently exited while buzz about cutbacks was only hazily acknowledged.

The big events at Bristol Myers in recent years included hitting big on PD-1, only to hand the crown of reigning heavyweight player to Merck, followed by the Celgene buyout. The Celgene deal gave Bristol Myers an aging Revlimid, which has gone on to become a problem as generics carve up the franchise. Meanwhile, they’re putting their hopes in growing Opdualag (the Opdivo combo with the LAG-3 relatlimab) and Abecma (the old BCMA CAR-T ide-cel, partnered with bluebird and facing stiff competition) into much, much bigger drugs. But it’s going to be a race.

Bristol Myers’ late-stage pipeline, though, has proven to be a disappointment to many, leaving the company scrambling to position itself against the IRA while sorting through a reorg. That sets the stage for a lot of talk about deals without a whole lot of follow through to this stage. The recent undoing of their IL-12 deal with Dragonfly, which featured their reluctance to follow through on their initial $650 million investment, also highlighted internal turmoil as the company finds itself at another crossroads.


Vas Narasimhan

  • R&D spending 2022: $9.08 billion
  • R&D spending 2021: $9.04 billion
  • R&D as a percentage of spending: 18%
  • Change: Flat
  • Sales revenue: $50.5 billion
  • R&D chief: Shreeram Aradhye
  • Ticker: $NVS

7. Novartis: As its big clearance event continues, where’s the upside?

The big picture: The big story at Novartis hasn’t been about building the pipeline or portfolio. It’s been more about stripping them down. There was the recent decision to bow out of its Sangamo alliance, drop a set of ophthalmology assets, offload its big generics arm Sandoz and dispose of other assets as well.

The backdrop has been a $1 billion restructuring that has cut staffers — including R&D chief John Tsai — brought in Ronny Gal as new strategist and cut CEO Vas Narasimhan’s pay by a hefty 25%.

Novartis has a late-stage pipeline to talk about, but it’s dogged by Narasimhan’s history of touting drugs that never really panned out. And most of the pipeline news isn’t expected to arrive this year anyway.

The malaise has only heightened expectations that a major player like Novartis has to be planning something — perhaps something big. If it’s clearing the decks for something that can spark some interest in its future, we’ll wait and see. But a new set of small bolt-ons will likely fall flat on Wall Street.

Narasimhan is angling to get into the top set of drug makers in the US. We still don’t know just how he plans to do that.


Dave Ricks

  • R&D spending 2022: $7.2 billion
  • R&D spending 2021: $6.9 billion
  • R&D as a percentage of spending: 25%
  • Change: +4%
  • Sales revenue: $28.5 billion
  • R&D chief: Dan Skovronsky
  • Ticker: $LLY

8. Eli Lilly: Sure, they’ve made lots of mistakes. But the big successes keep shining through

The big picture: Historically, Eli Lilly has been one of the slowest movers in Big Pharma R&D. But even in the doldrums of its worst days, the company has consistently managed to come up with big, blockbuster meds that go a long way to dispel the frets about its performance.

Solidly in the middle of the Top 15 pack, Eli Lilly’s latest, greatest drug is Mounjaro (tirzepatide), the diabetes treatment that promises to have a big future in obesity, rivaling Novo Nordisk. All signs point to a major success. In the meantime, Lilly had a setback on its Alzheimer’s drug donanemab, which the FDA rejected for an accelerated approval after an OK for Leqembi from Eisai and Biogen.

That hasn’t done much to dampen enthusiasts’ rah-rah over Eli Lilly’s prospects in Alzheimer’s. Even a later arrival in a market like this could move the bottom-line needle. But after Aduhelm, the old rose-colored assumptions have been under review.

Lilly, of course, isn’t about to step aside. They just completed their last, ultimate failure for solanezumab, a drug that’s been as dead as a fossil for years. But this is Alzheimer’s, where blockbuster hopes spring eternal even as patients, doctors and critics heap on the abuse.

So we’ll see.

Once upon a time, Eli Lilly’s management promised two new drug approvals a year. That didn’t happen, of course, but when your sole approval in 2022 is Mounjaro, who cares? Total drug approvals per year is not the number that counts.


Paul Hudson

  • R&D spending 2022: 6.7 billion euros ($7.2 billion)
  • R&D spending 2021: 5.7 billion euros ($6.15 billion)
  • R&D as a percentage of spending: 16%
  • Change: +17%
  • Sales revenue: 43 billion euros ($46.4 billion)
  • R&D chief: Dietmar Berger (interim)
  • Ticker: $SNY

9. Sanofi: Paul Hudson is hunkered down on a turnaround for Sanofi, but it’s never easy

The big picture: Sanofi’s recent deal to acquire Provention and its approved diabetes drug says a lot about the mindset in Big Pharma today. CEO Paul Hudson has made plenty of bolt-on bets on R&D to try and spark some excitement about its future, but only a sure thing like a marketed drug can be convincing in this economy. And Sanofi got beat out in a $28 billion bidding war with Amgen for Horizon, indicating both their interest in bigger deals and a reluctance to go overboard.

Meanwhile, Sanofi’s R&D group has had a well-earned rep for the blahs over the years, with leaders cheering on a few prospects and doing deals to help swell expectations. It hasn’t completely failed, but it hasn’t really worked, either. And making plays in fields like mRNA hasn’t done much to give the global player a rep for cutting-edge work.

What has worked, with enormous success, is Dupixent, which continues to wrack up growing sales and fresh positives in new studies. Just days ago, we saw that play out again as analysts assessed the increased potential of COPD. And it underscores a central theme at Big Pharma: One megablockbuster success can atone for multiple R&D sins.

But they partnered on that drug with the unruly crew at Regeneron, which didn’t do much for Sanofi’s rep in drug development. On the marketing side, they have every reason to give themselves a pat on the back.

There’s also still the Zantac litigation, which lingers with setbacks for GSK in California. Sanofi, like others, decided to settle the lead case in the litigant-friendly state and still has to consider what can come on the state side. A federal judge went a long way to shoring up defenses nationally after kicking out thousands of cases.


Emma Walmsley

  • R&D spending 2022: 5.5 billion pounds  ($6.7 billion)
  • R&D spending 2021: 5.0 billion pounds ($6.1 billion)
  • R&D as a percentage of spending: 19%
  • Change: +10%
  • Sales revenue: 29.3 billion pounds ($35.7 billion)
  • R&D chief: Tony Wood
  • Ticker: $GSK

10. GSK: Two steps forward, one step back. ‘New’ GSK is still getting its act together

The big picture: GSK is one of those pharmas where you start with a pro/con list. And you still can’t quite decide where it comes out in a few years.

Shingrix is an indisputable success, with commercial legs that should carry it quite a distance. They’ve orchestrated a chorus of hallelujahs around RSV data, but given the competition here, you have to wonder if it’s all a little overdone. That one is ripe for disappointment if it fails to live up to its ambitious billing. And then there’s the Zantac litigation, where New GSK faces a very old problem over claims that it spurs cancer. That battle is now centered on a lead case in California after GSK scored a win on the federal side.

One of the problems with GSK is that CEO Emma Walmsley and former R&D chief Hal Barron rested their argument for an early transformation around the acquisition of Zejula, but the business case was always too thin and just recently got thinner. Tony Wood’s recent elevation to R&D chief was also followed by some quick deal terminations, which was likely necessary but hasn’t helped.

That all left them doing a string of bolt-ons that may yet deliver, but nothing is whipping up tremendous enthusiasm on Wall Street, where the company has been a consistent laggard.

GSK certainly isn’t in a terrible position. But after five years under new management, there’s a lot of chafing around their potential to do better.


Rick Gonzalez

  • R&D spending 2022: $6.5 billion
  • R&D spending 2021: $6.9 billion
  • R&D as a percentage of spending: 11%
  • Change: -6%
  • Sales revenue: $58 billion
  • R&D chief: Thomas Hudson
  • Ticker: $ABBV

11. AbbVie: A reliable performer, but how do you prepare for a problem like Humira?

The big picture: Now that generic competition is finally beginning to eat into its cash cow Humira, AbbVie’s long game in developing Rinvoq and Skyrizi to fill the growth category stands out in sharp relief. The management at team AbbVie under Rick Gonzalez has consistently performed to promise, and that has encouraged considerable loyalty among the analyst crew.

There was the Allergan buyout, which was mostly about the Botox franchise — again, predictable.

So what else is new?

Not much, which is a problem for CEO Rick Gonzalez. The loss of the Humira franchise can be managed, as his crew has proven, but it’s still going to be painful to watch. And it’s likely to put more pressure on the deals team to come up with some M&A that has some upside attraction built in. But in this market, experimental drugs with clear market potential will fetch a big price.


Daniel O’Day

  • R&D spending 2022: $5 billion
  • R&D spending 2021: $4.6 billion
  • R&D as a percentage of spending: 18.5%
  • Change: +8%
  • Sales revenue: $27 billion
  • CMO: Merdad Parsey
  • Ticker: $GILD

12. Gilead: If at first you don’t succeed….

The big picture: Gilead’s numbers have been a bit of a yawner for years. The company has reliably kept an iron grip on the HIV market, running out new therapies that offer patients easier disease maintenance and batting back ViiV’s persistent efforts to catch up and surpass them in the field.

The Gilead team has been helped by their competence with Yescarta, the leading CAR-T that has steadily worked at being more reliably produced by the manufacturing arm. The team at Kite, where both its president — Christi Shaw — and R&D chief have announced departures, has shown the kind of steadfast competence that improves franchises. And as always, the promise of off-the-shelf rivals threatens to upset the apple cart, though rivals are making slow progress.

As long as Gilead maintains a commanding lead in the science of the HIV field, though, it has a solid foundation to build on. And therein lies the problem. In the four years since Dan O’Day took the helm, he’s struck a string of deals to get ahold of the next generation of breakthrough drugs. And with one eye on immunotherapies, the effort has regularly been bedeviled by setbacks.

The biggest of these failures was its unfortunate gamble on filgotinib; there were mixed expectations on Trodelvy, now complicated further by AstraZeneca’s Enhertu success; plus some recent questions about the Arcus TIGIT data didn’t help.

O’Day, though, shows every sign of sticking it out to achieve the turnaround he’s promised. But it won’t be easy.


Christophe Weber

  • R&D spending 2022: $4.75 billion
  • R&D spending 2021: $4.49 billion
  • R&D as a percentage of spending: N/A
  • Change: +6%
  • Sales revenue: N/A
  • R&D chief: Andrew Plump
  • Ticker: $TAK

13. Takeda: Five years post-Shire buyout, the R&D team stays focused on the next big thing

The big picture: Takeda is unique in the top 15 in counting revenue through the four quarters ending at the end of Q1. But they offered their 2022 R&D spend broken down by quarters so we could rank them in the majors.

Takeda set out to engineer a major makeover for itself when Christophe Webber took the top post and Andy Plump stepped into the R&D lead role — based in the Boston area — as the aging Japanese player remade itself as a global player. The $64 billion Shire takeover figured prominently in that.

Plump and I talked about that recently as we discussed the Phase IIb data that rolled in for their TYK2 drug, acquired from Nimbus for $4 billion in cash plus $2 billion in sales milestones. In this league, human data is essential to completing major deals. The R&D 15 are looking for approved or relatively near-term shots on the FDA goal line. De-risking is worth billions if you can reasonably point to a major market opportunity.

And the data on TYK2 are good, so far.

But Takeda has executed repeatedly on pipeline growth, including its build-to-buy play for GammaDelta on the cell therapy side. While still not in the top 10, the top execs remain delighted by the deals and potential of what they build. And they give the impression that more lies ahead.


Robert Bradway

  • R&D spending 2022: $4.4 billion
  • R&D spending 2021: $4.8 billion
  • R&D as a percentage of spending: 18%
  • Change: -8%
  • Sales revenue: $24.8 billion
  • R&D chief: David Reese
  • Ticker: $AMGN

14. Amgen: A two-prong strategy combines some discovery magic with a hardcore focus on the portfolio

The big picture: Amgen’s executive crew, led by Bob Bradway, has an amazing ability to whip up excitement about a key program, which tends to shut out any criticism of a pipeline that doesn’t do all that much.

Recently the big deal was KRAS, where Amgen justifiably garnered lots of breakthrough excitement on one of the toughest targets in biopharma R&D, only to see the balloon deflate as their drug failed to live up to what had become a bit overblown.

Now the spotlight has turned to AMG133, an oral obesity drug only now going into mid-stage studies. Amgen has caught some of the enthusiasm sparked by Novo Nordisk’s semaglutide and Eli Lilly’s tirzepatide. Both are going to wrack up enormous sales after gaining their entry into the diabetes market.

Whether it all pans out or not, Amgen can be credited with a very effective marketing campaign giving themselves a big boost on the share price.

The discovery angle, though, is just one side of a two-prong strategy at Amgen. Its recent acquisition of Horizon for $28 billion underscores a big appetite for sure things, which it also demonstrated with the $13.4 billion deal to acquire Otezla, factoring in higher prices while a key rival grew in the clinic.


Leonard Schleifer

  • R&D spending 2022: $3.6 billion
  • R&D spending 2021: $2.9 billion
  • R&D as a percentage of spending: 29%
  • Change: +24%
  • Sales revenue: $12.2 billion (including collaboration revenue)
  • R&D chief: George Yancopoulos
  • Ticker: $REGN

15. Regeneron: The founders’ first hits went platinum, and now the critics are demanding another

The big picture: Legendary company founders Len Schleifer and George Yancopoulos proved that they could move markets and build a major player on the basis of two key franchises: Eylea and Dupixent, which they developed in a 50/50 deal with Sanofi. They’re the hottest shooters in the field, and they kept the fast draw on display during Covid, raking in an overnight fortune that is now slipping away.

But what have they done for you lately?

No one gets to rest on their laurels in biopharma, and the big challenge for Regeneron now is to prove that they can keep on making R&D magic. Yancopoulos, who has proven to be outspoken on every subject handed to him, has enjoyed talking up the historic potential of their “homegrown” PSMAxCD28 costimulatory bispecific antibody REGN5678, in combination with their PD-1 checkpoint Libtayo. And company execs have made the rounds to discuss new standards for follicular lymphoma.

But when you’re talking I/O, bodacious claims tend to run a little thin among analysts. Regeneron has actual innovation built into its DNA — they walk the walk on R&D — but the mood now is definitely more on the “show me” side with hard data that can make its own clear case.

Regeneron has the kind of foundational commercial portfolio that has made them a sterling performer in biopharma. But reaching for new upside in 2023 is going to be an uphill battle — even for two players like Schleifer and Yancopoulos.

Read More

Continue Reading

International

There will soon be one million seats on this popular Amtrak route

“More people are taking the train than ever before,” says Amtrak’s Executive Vice President.

Published

on

While the size of the United States makes it hard for it to compete with the inter-city train access available in places like Japan and many European countries, Amtrak trains are a very popular transportation option in certain pockets of the country — so much so that the country’s national railway company is expanding its Northeast Corridor by more than one million seats.

Related: This is what it's like to take a 19-hour train from New York to Chicago

Running from Boston all the way south to Washington, D.C., the route is one of the most popular as it passes through the most densely populated part of the country and serves as a commuter train for those who need to go between East Coast cities such as New York and Philadelphia for business.

Veronika Bondarenko captured this photo of New York’s Moynihan Train Hall. 

Veronika Bondarenko

Amtrak launches new routes, promises travelers ‘additional travel options’

Earlier this month, Amtrak announced that it was adding four additional Northeastern routes to its schedule — two more routes between New York’s Penn Station and Union Station in Washington, D.C. on the weekend, a new early-morning weekday route between New York and Philadelphia’s William H. Gray III 30th Street Station and a weekend route between Philadelphia and Boston’s South Station.

More Travel:

According to Amtrak, these additions will increase Northeast Corridor’s service by 20% on the weekdays and 10% on the weekends for a total of one million additional seats when counted by how many will ride the corridor over the year.

“More people are taking the train than ever before and we’re proud to offer our customers additional travel options when they ride with us on the Northeast Regional,” Amtrak Executive Vice President and Chief Commercial Officer Eliot Hamlisch said in a statement on the new routes. “The Northeast Regional gets you where you want to go comfortably, conveniently and sustainably as you breeze past traffic on I-95 for a more enjoyable travel experience.”

Here are some of the other Amtrak changes you can expect to see

Amtrak also said that, in the 2023 financial year, the Northeast Corridor had nearly 9.2 million riders — 8% more than it had pre-pandemic and a 29% increase from 2022. The higher demand, particularly during both off-peak hours and the time when many business travelers use to get to work, is pushing Amtrak to invest into this corridor in particular.

To reach more customers, Amtrak has also made several changes to both its routes and pricing system. In the fall of 2023, it introduced a type of new “Night Owl Fare” — if traveling during very late or very early hours, one can go between cities like New York and Philadelphia or Philadelphia and Washington. D.C. for $5 to $15.

As travel on the same routes during peak hours can reach as much as $300, this was a deliberate move to reach those who have the flexibility of time and might have otherwise preferred more affordable methods of transportation such as the bus. After seeing strong uptake, Amtrak added this type of fare to more Boston routes.

The largest distances, such as the ones between Boston and New York or New York and Washington, are available at the lowest rate for $20.

Read More

Continue Reading

International

The next pandemic? It’s already here for Earth’s wildlife

Bird flu is decimating species already threatened by climate change and habitat loss.

I am a conservation biologist who studies emerging infectious diseases. When people ask me what I think the next pandemic will be I often say that we are in the midst of one – it’s just afflicting a great many species more than ours.

I am referring to the highly pathogenic strain of avian influenza H5N1 (HPAI H5N1), otherwise known as bird flu, which has killed millions of birds and unknown numbers of mammals, particularly during the past three years.

This is the strain that emerged in domestic geese in China in 1997 and quickly jumped to humans in south-east Asia with a mortality rate of around 40-50%. My research group encountered the virus when it killed a mammal, an endangered Owston’s palm civet, in a captive breeding programme in Cuc Phuong National Park Vietnam in 2005.

How these animals caught bird flu was never confirmed. Their diet is mainly earthworms, so they had not been infected by eating diseased poultry like many captive tigers in the region.

This discovery prompted us to collate all confirmed reports of fatal infection with bird flu to assess just how broad a threat to wildlife this virus might pose.

This is how a newly discovered virus in Chinese poultry came to threaten so much of the world’s biodiversity.

H5N1 originated on a Chinese poultry farm in 1997. ChameleonsEye/Shutterstock

The first signs

Until December 2005, most confirmed infections had been found in a few zoos and rescue centres in Thailand and Cambodia. Our analysis in 2006 showed that nearly half (48%) of all the different groups of birds (known to taxonomists as “orders”) contained a species in which a fatal infection of bird flu had been reported. These 13 orders comprised 84% of all bird species.

We reasoned 20 years ago that the strains of H5N1 circulating were probably highly pathogenic to all bird orders. We also showed that the list of confirmed infected species included those that were globally threatened and that important habitats, such as Vietnam’s Mekong delta, lay close to reported poultry outbreaks.

Mammals known to be susceptible to bird flu during the early 2000s included primates, rodents, pigs and rabbits. Large carnivores such as Bengal tigers and clouded leopards were reported to have been killed, as well as domestic cats.

Our 2006 paper showed the ease with which this virus crossed species barriers and suggested it might one day produce a pandemic-scale threat to global biodiversity.

Unfortunately, our warnings were correct.

A roving sickness

Two decades on, bird flu is killing species from the high Arctic to mainland Antarctica.

In the past couple of years, bird flu has spread rapidly across Europe and infiltrated North and South America, killing millions of poultry and a variety of bird and mammal species. A recent paper found that 26 countries have reported at least 48 mammal species that have died from the virus since 2020, when the latest increase in reported infections started.

Not even the ocean is safe. Since 2020, 13 species of aquatic mammal have succumbed, including American sea lions, porpoises and dolphins, often dying in their thousands in South America. A wide range of scavenging and predatory mammals that live on land are now also confirmed to be susceptible, including mountain lions, lynx, brown, black and polar bears.

The UK alone has lost over 75% of its great skuas and seen a 25% decline in northern gannets. Recent declines in sandwich terns (35%) and common terns (42%) were also largely driven by the virus.

Scientists haven’t managed to completely sequence the virus in all affected species. Research and continuous surveillance could tell us how adaptable it ultimately becomes, and whether it can jump to even more species. We know it can already infect humans – one or more genetic mutations may make it more infectious.

At the crossroads

Between January 1 2003 and December 21 2023, 882 cases of human infection with the H5N1 virus were reported from 23 countries, of which 461 (52%) were fatal.

Of these fatal cases, more than half were in Vietnam, China, Cambodia and Laos. Poultry-to-human infections were first recorded in Cambodia in December 2003. Intermittent cases were reported until 2014, followed by a gap until 2023, yielding 41 deaths from 64 cases. The subtype of H5N1 virus responsible has been detected in poultry in Cambodia since 2014. In the early 2000s, the H5N1 virus circulating had a high human mortality rate, so it is worrying that we are now starting to see people dying after contact with poultry again.

It’s not just H5 subtypes of bird flu that concern humans. The H10N1 virus was originally isolated from wild birds in South Korea, but has also been reported in samples from China and Mongolia.

Recent research found that these particular virus subtypes may be able to jump to humans after they were found to be pathogenic in laboratory mice and ferrets. The first person who was confirmed to be infected with H10N5 died in China on January 27 2024, but this patient was also suffering from seasonal flu (H3N2). They had been exposed to live poultry which also tested positive for H10N5.

Species already threatened with extinction are among those which have died due to bird flu in the past three years. The first deaths from the virus in mainland Antarctica have just been confirmed in skuas, highlighting a looming threat to penguin colonies whose eggs and chicks skuas prey on. Humboldt penguins have already been killed by the virus in Chile.

A colony of king penguins.
Remote penguin colonies are already threatened by climate change. AndreAnita/Shutterstock

How can we stem this tsunami of H5N1 and other avian influenzas? Completely overhaul poultry production on a global scale. Make farms self-sufficient in rearing eggs and chicks instead of exporting them internationally. The trend towards megafarms containing over a million birds must be stopped in its tracks.

To prevent the worst outcomes for this virus, we must revisit its primary source: the incubator of intensive poultry farms.

Diana Bell does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Read More

Continue Reading

International

This is the biggest money mistake you’re making during travel

A retail expert talks of some common money mistakes travelers make on their trips.

Published

on

Travel is expensive. Despite the explosion of travel demand in the two years since the world opened up from the pandemic, survey after survey shows that financial reasons are the biggest factor keeping some from taking their desired trips.

Airfare, accommodation as well as food and entertainment during the trip have all outpaced inflation over the last four years.

Related: This is why we're still spending an insane amount of money on travel

But while there are multiple tricks and “travel hacks” for finding cheaper plane tickets and accommodation, the biggest financial mistake that leads to blown travel budgets is much smaller and more insidious.

A traveler watches a plane takeoff at an airport gate.

Jeshoots on Unsplash

This is what you should (and shouldn’t) spend your money on while abroad

“When it comes to traveling, it's hard to resist buying items so you can have a piece of that memory at home,” Kristen Gall, a retail expert who heads the financial planning section at points-back platform Rakuten, told Travel + Leisure in an interview. “However, it's important to remember that you don't need every souvenir that catches your eye.”

More Travel:

According to Gall, souvenirs not only have a tendency to add up in price but also weight which can in turn require one to pay for extra weight or even another suitcase at the airport — over the last two months, airlines like Delta  (DAL) , American Airlines  (AAL)  and JetBlue Airways  (JBLU)  have all followed each other in increasing baggage prices to in some cases as much as $60 for a first bag and $100 for a second one.

While such extras may not seem like a lot compared to the thousands one might have spent on the hotel and ticket, they all have what is sometimes known as a “coffee” or “takeout effect” in which small expenses can lead one to overspend by a large amount.

‘Save up for one special thing rather than a bunch of trinkets…’

“When traveling abroad, I recommend only purchasing items that you can't get back at home, or that are small enough to not impact your luggage weight,” Gall said. “If you’re set on bringing home a souvenir, save up for one special thing, rather than wasting your money on a bunch of trinkets you may not think twice about once you return home.”

Along with the immediate costs, there is also the risk of purchasing things that go to waste when returning home from an international vacation. Alcohol is subject to airlines’ liquid rules while certain types of foods, particularly meat and other animal products, can be confiscated by customs. 

While one incident of losing an expensive bottle of liquor or cheese brought back from a country like France will often make travelers forever careful, those who travel internationally less frequently will often be unaware of specific rules and be forced to part with something they spent money on at the airport.

“It's important to keep in mind that you're going to have to travel back with everything you purchased,” Gall continued. “[…] Be careful when buying food or wine, as it may not make it through customs. Foods like chocolate are typically fine, but items like meat and produce are likely prohibited to come back into the country.

Related: Veteran fund manager picks favorite stocks for 2024

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending