Chi­na has be­come a CEO-lev­el pri­or­i­ty for multi­na­tion­al phar­ma­ceu­ti­cal com­pa­nies: the trend and the im­pli­ca­tions

Af­ter a “hot” pe­ri­od of rapid growth be­tween 2009 and 2012, and a rel­a­tive­ly “cool­er” pe­ri­od of slow­er growth from 2013 to 2015, Chi­na has once again be­come a top-of-mind pri­or­i­ty for the CEOs of most large, multi­na­tion­al phar­ma­ceu­ti­cal com­pa­nies.

At the In­ter­na­tion­al Phar­ma Fo­rum, host­ed in March in Bei­jing by the R&D Based Phar­ma­ceu­ti­cal As­so­ci­a­tion Com­mit­tee (RD­PAC) and the Phar­ma­ceu­ti­cal Re­search and Man­u­fac­tur­ers of Amer­i­ca (PhRMA), no few­er than sev­en CEOs of ma­jor multi­na­tion­al phar­ma­ceu­ti­cal firms par­tic­i­pat­ed, in­clud­ing GSK, Eli Lil­ly, LEO Phar­ma, Mer­ck KGaA, Pfiz­er, Sanofi and UCB. A few days ear­li­er, the CEOs of sev­er­al oth­er large multi­na­tion­als at­tend­ed the Chi­na De­vel­op­ment Fo­rum, an an­nu­al busi­ness fo­rum host­ed by the re­search arm of Chi­na’s State Coun­cil. It’s hard to imag­ine any oth­er coun­try, ex­cept the US, hav­ing such draw­ing pow­er at CEO lev­el.

What’s be­hind this trend? And more im­por­tant­ly, what are the im­pli­ca­tions?

I see four pri­ma­ry sources of val­ue cre­ation, ap­plic­a­ble across in­dus­tries for multi­na­tion­als op­er­at­ing in Chi­na, and nine main im­pli­ca­tions for phar­ma multi­na­tion­als to pon­der and de­bate.

1. Growth from mil­lions to bil­lions: Chi­na is al­ready a key con­trib­u­tor to the rev­enues and growth of multi­na­tion­al phar­ma com­pa­nies

This trend is not unique to the phar­ma­ceu­ti­cal sec­tor and can al­so be ob­served in medtech as well as the con­sumer and au­to sec­tors. For ex­am­ple, by 2030 Chi­na’s con­tri­bu­tion to glob­al growth in per­son­al con­sump­tion is ex­pect­ed to be equal to that of the US and West­ern Eu­rope com­bined. It is al­ready the largest mar­ket for sev­er­al im­por­tant prod­uct cat­e­gories, rang­ing from lux­u­ry goods to cars.

The trend is made clear in the quar­ter­ly earn­ings re­leas­es of most ma­jor phar­ma­ceu­ti­cal multi­na­tion­als. Their per­for­mance in Chi­na is of­ten a bright spot, and one they in­creas­ing­ly show­case. Some com­pa­nies even po­si­tion Chi­na as a “key pil­lar of fu­ture growth.”

For some, Chi­na is al­ready a top two con­trib­u­tor to to­tal top-line rev­enues, sec­ond on­ly to the US, while for oth­ers, it is the main growth dri­ver. At the end of the sec­ond quar­ter this year, sev­er­al com­pa­nies dis­closed year-to-date Chi­na growth fig­ures well above 30%. Giv­en the scale of busi­ness­es op­er­at­ing in Chi­na to­day—sev­er­al of which have rev­enues in the USD bil­lions—these num­bers have a mean­ing­ful im­pact on glob­al per­for­mance. For some com­pa­nies, Chi­na ac­counts for as much as 25% of glob­al growth.

2. In­no­va­tion: Chi­na is an emerg­ing source of prod­uct, port­fo­lio, and busi­ness mod­el in­no­va­tion

In a re­cent in­ter­view with Chi­na Dai­ly, No­var­tis’ head of glob­al drug de­vel­op­ment and chief med­ical of­fi­cer an­nounced that the com­pa­ny is work­ing on “hav­ing every piv­otal drug de­vel­op­ment pro­gram in­clude Chi­na from the be­gin­ning by de­fault.” Many com­pa­nies are em­bark­ing on that jour­ney, made pos­si­ble by the Na­tion­al Med­ical Prod­ucts Ad­min­is­tra­tion (NM­PA) re­form.

Be­yond pipeline man­age­ment and ac­cel­er­a­tion, com­pa­nies are al­so tap­ping in­to Chi­na’s in­no­va­tion ecosys­tem. In the last three years we have seen As­traZeneca open a Com­mer­cial In­no­va­tion Cen­ter in Wuxi, Sanofi open a glob­al re­search in­sti­tute in Suzhou, Mer­ck KGaA open In­no­va­tion Hubs in sev­er­al lo­ca­tions, J&J in­tro­duce its JLAB con­cept in Shang­hai, No­vo Nordisk open its IN­NO­VO cen­ter in Bei­jing, and Roche an­nounce a new ear­ly re­search cen­ter in Shang­hai. While they may vary in scope and op­er­at­ing mod­els, all these cen­ters typ­i­cal­ly aim at fos­ter­ing in­no­va­tion through part­ner­ships with oth­er play­ers in the ecosys­tem.

3. Glob­al sup­ply chain: Chi­na emerg­ing in a more cen­tral role for bio­phar­ma

Sec­tors such as ad­vanced elec­tron­ics are like­ly to give Chi­na a cen­tral role in their glob­al sup­ply chain. For the bio­phar­ma sec­tor, how­ev­er, the trend is on­ly emerg­ing. While we do see sig­nif­i­cant man­u­fac­tur­ing ca­pac­i­ty for small mol­e­cule or­gan­ic com­pounds in main­land Chi­na—for both the Chi­nese mar­ket and for ex­port—multi­na­tion­al com­pa­nies have so far re­sist­ed adding ca­pac­i­ty for large mol­e­cule man­u­fac­tur­ing. This can be ex­plained by sev­er­al fac­tors, but most no­tably a con­cern around IP pro­tec­tion. One would ex­pect that, over time, this will be­come in­creas­ing­ly man­age­able. Al­ready, we ob­serve that some com­pa­nies, such as Boehringer In­gel­heim, op­er­ate plants for large mol­e­cule con­tract man­u­fac­tur­ing in main­land Chi­na, while oth­ers, like Lon­za, have an­nounced plans to do so.

4. Cap­i­tal and tal­ent: Chi­na’s role ex­pand­ing as a source of both

We have seen this trend play out clear­ly in the world of biotech, with Chi­nese VCs be­ing very ac­tive play­ers in glob­al fund­ing. In fact, in 2018, rough­ly 40% of biotech fund­ing in the US came from Chi­nese sources. We al­so see Chi­na phar­ma­cos and in­vestors—in­clud­ing Luye Phar­ma and Fo­s­un—mak­ing larg­er and larg­er strate­gic in­vest­ments out­side of Chi­na, how­ev­er it is still an ear­ly trend. On the tal­ent side, sev­er­al se­nior ex­ec­u­tives of lead­ing phar­ma com­pa­nies are Chi­na-based. For ex­am­ple, the cur­rent EVP of In­ter­na­tion­al for As­traZeneca and the head of the AP­MA re­gion for No­var­tis are both of Chi­nese ori­gin and based in Shang­hai.

So what does it all mean? Here are a few im­pli­ca­tions, and pre­dic­tions…

Up and up: Chi­na’s im­por­tance in many phar­ma com­pa­nies’ glob­al agen­das will con­tin­ue to rise, with an in­creas­ing num­ber of com­pa­nies man­ag­ing Chi­na as a re­gion, rather than as a coun­try with­in Asia-Pa­cif­ic. This is not to say that the cur­rent mod­el won’t con­tin­ue to work well, but as Chi­na grows big­ger as a coun­try, its ap­petite for in­vest­ment and im­pact on re­gion­al per­for­mance be­comes such that the APAC re­gion will in­creas­ing­ly re­sem­ble a Chi­na+ re­gion. As a re­sult, many com­pa­nies may de­cide to have Chi­na re­port more di­rect­ly to the CEO or to a di­rect re­port to the CEO.

Be­ware of the spot­light: The top-line con­tri­bu­tion of Chi­na to rev­enues and growth will be­come a hot top­ic, giv­en the vis­i­bil­i­ty of these met­rics to glob­al in­vestors. We are reach­ing the point at which per­for­mance in Chi­na can “move a stock.” The chal­lenge, how­ev­er, is pre­dict­ing Chi­na’s fu­ture growth with ac­cu­ra­cy—it re­mains at best a “guessti­mate.” Com­pa­nies will need to man­age ex­pec­ta­tions but could still find them­selves sur­prised by their per­for­mance on a quar­ter by quar­ter ba­sis.

Ex­pect peer pres­sure: As more and more com­pa­nies com­mu­ni­cate to in­vestors about their Chi­na per­for­mance and strat­e­gy, more dis­creet com­pa­nies could be asked by fi­nan­cial an­a­lysts to clar­i­fy their strate­gic stance to­wards the mar­ket. This is not to say that all com­pa­nies should nec­es­sar­i­ly make Chi­na a top pri­or­i­ty. But not do­ing so may in­creas­ing­ly re­quire a clear ex­pla­na­tion.

Be wary of ten­sions emerg­ing with pro­po­nents of the sta­tus quo: As Chi­na takes its right­ful po­si­tion at the glob­al board­room ta­ble, in­ter­nal ten­sions with tra­di­tion­al de­vel­oped mar­kets could in­crease. The rise of Chi­na as a glob­al pri­or­i­ty will in­evitably lead to some soul search­ing in mar­kets where growth prospects are more un­cer­tain or even de­clin­ing. Com­mit­ting to Chi­na re­quires more al­lo­ca­tion of re­sources—par­tic­u­lar­ly cap­i­tal and tal­ent—and will in­evitably lead to dif­fi­cult bud­getary dis­cus­sions as com­pa­nies aim to max­i­mize ROI on a glob­al ba­sis.

Mind the gap in sup­ply chain: De­mand in Chi­na is on a scale not seen else­where in the world. In the last few years, we have wit­nessed some sup­ply chain dis­rup­tion due to the sud­den up­take of de­mand post-re­im­burse­ment, for ex­am­ple. Go­ing for­ward, al­lo­ca­tion of sup­ply to Chi­na could be­come a com­plex strate­gic de­ci­sion that con­sid­ers the sig­nif­i­cant up­side in vol­ume, but will al­so, in some cas­es, need to be weighed against the low­er price point of drugs re­quired to se­cure na­tion­al re­im­burse­ment in Chi­na. The ques­tion of ramp­ing up lo­cal man­u­fac­tur­ing to sup­ply the lo­cal mar­ket will be square­ly on the ta­ble.

Count on the tal­ent mar­ket to heat up: The rapid growth of the mar­ket is cre­at­ing an ex­cep­tion­al en­vi­ron­ment for tal­ent­ed ex­ec­u­tives at both multi­na­tion­al phar­ma and lo­cal Chi­nese biotech com­pa­nies to pur­sue a range of at­trac­tive ca­reer op­por­tu­ni­ties. To stay com­pet­i­tive in this new mar­ket for tal­ent, com­pa­nies will need to fun­da­men­tal­ly re­think their val­ue propo­si­tion to the tal­ent they hope to hire—and re­tain in Chi­na. Just adapt­ing a glob­al recipe for tal­ent man­age­ment may not be enough to sus­tain dif­fer­en­ti­a­tion.

Plan for “fast and slow” in­te­gra­tion with glob­al R&D: In­te­gra­tion with glob­al R&D re­mains a work-in-progress. The strate­gic in­tent is rel­a­tive­ly clear. But the abil­i­ty to ex­e­cute the strat­e­gy re­mains a chal­lenge in the con­text of what is still a de­vel­op­ing in­no­va­tion ecosys­tem. Suc­cess will de­pend on sev­er­al key fac­tors, in­clud­ing: 1) How much a com­pa­ny can mo­ti­vate and mo­bi­lize its glob­al prod­uct lead­ers to ful­ly en­gage the Chi­na team; 2) Clear strate­gic align­ment and ef­fec­tive com­mu­ni­ca­tion be­tween the glob­al and Chi­na prod­uct teams to dri­ve ro­bust strat­e­gy, along with high qual­i­ty and rapid ex­e­cu­tion; 3) A strong and ca­pa­ble Chi­na team that can put Chi­na in­to the glob­al con­text and ef­fec­tive­ly in­flu­ence the glob­al or­ga­ni­za­tion. This is not an easy for­mu­la to fol­low.

Con­sid­er Chi­na a “must-have” on a se­nior ex­ec­u­tive re­sume with glob­al as­pi­ra­tions: Chi­na ex­pe­ri­ence can be a big ca­reer boost and it’s a mes­sage that will be in­creas­ing­ly heard by mid­dle man­age­ment. What bet­ter prov­ing ground for fu­ture se­nior ex­ec­u­tives than ex­pe­ri­ence run­ning their Chi­na busi­ness? Chi­na is a large, volatile mar­ket, where the com­plex­i­ty of en­gage­ment with ex­ter­nal stake­hold­ers is among the high­est any­where, and the pace of ex­ter­nal change is of­ten greater than the pace of in­ter­nal change. We al­ready have ex­am­ples of this trend, in­clud­ing the cur­rent CEOs of Lil­ly, GSK, and Bio­gen Idec who all held se­nior re­spon­si­bil­i­ties in Chi­na at some point in their ca­reer.

Ex­pect the un­ex­pect­ed: Chi­na will not fail to sur­prise us. While the news cov­er­age has been large­ly pos­i­tive for multi­na­tion­als in the last few years—Chi­na’s new “4+7” vol­ume-based pur­chas­ing pol­i­cy aside—some bumps on the road should be ex­pect­ed. Re­silience and com­mit­ment will be test­ed. Ul­ti­mate­ly, Chi­na re­mains a “high risk, high re­ward” mar­ket.

Chi­na is the most ex­cit­ing health­care sto­ry in the world to­day. The lat­est chap­ter of ro­bust per­for­mance by multi­na­tion­als is just an ex­am­ple of that.

If you en­joyed this blog, please share com­ments and con­sid­er read­ing my pri­or en­tries, all avail­able un­der my LinkedIn pro­file. Most re­cent ones in­clude views on re­cent in­vest­ment trends in Chi­na health­care, re­flec­tions on the Cam­bri­an ex­plo­sion of Chi­na biotechs, and per­spec­tives on 8 rea­sons why Chi­na is the most ex­cit­ing health­care sto­ry in the world right now.


Al­so pub­lished on LinkedIn. Franck Le Deu (@fle864) is a Se­nior Part­ner with McK­in­sey & Com­pa­ny, lead­ing the Health­care Prac­tice in Greater Chi­na and serv­ing clients across Asia. 

Brian Kaspar. AveXis via Twitter

AveX­is sci­en­tif­ic founder fires back at No­var­tis CEO Vas Narasimhan, 'cat­e­gor­i­cal­ly de­nies any wrong­do­ing'

Brian Kaspar’s head was among the first to roll at Novartis after company execs became aware of the fact that manipulated data had been included in its application for Zolgensma, now the world’s most expensive therapy.

But in his first public response, the scientific founder at AveXis — acquired by Novartis for $8.7 billion — is firing back. And he says that not only was he not involved in any wrongdoing, he’s ready to defend his name as needed.

I reached out to Brian Kaspar after Novartis put out word that he and his brother Allen had been axed in mid-May, two months after the company became aware of the allegations related to manipulated data. His response came back through his attorneys.

Endpoints News

Basic subscription required

Unlock this story instantly and join 57,600+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Novartis CEO Vas Narasimhan [via Bloomberg/Getty]

I’m not per­fect: No­var­tis chief Vas Narasimhan al­most apol­o­gizes in the wake of a new cri­sis

Vas Narasimhan has warily stepped up with what might pass as something close to a borderline apology for the latest scandal to engulf Novartis.

But he couldn’t quite get there.

Endpoints News

Basic subscription required

Unlock this story instantly and join 57,600+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

FDA to Sarep­ta: Your wide­ly an­tic­i­pat­ed fol­lowup to Ex­ondys 51 is not get­ting an ac­cel­er­at­ed OK for Duchenne MD

In one of the least anticipated moves of the year, the FDA has rejected Sarepta’s application for an accelerated approval of its Duchenne MD drug golodirsen after fretting over safety issues.

In a statement that arrived after the bell on Monday, Sarepta explained the CRL, saying:

Endpoints News

Basic subscription required

Unlock this story instantly and join 57,600+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Levi Garraway. Broad Institute via Youtube

Roche raids Eli Lil­ly for its next chief med­ical of­fi­cer as San­dra Horn­ing plans to step down

We found out Monday morning where Levi Garraway was headed after he left Eli Lilly as head of oncology R&D a few days ago. Roche named Garraway as their new chief medical officer, replacing Sandra Horning, who they say is retiring from the company.

Endpoints News

Basic subscription required

Unlock this story instantly and join 57,600+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Af­ter a posse of Wall Street an­a­lysts pre­dict a like­ly new win for Sarep­ta, we're down to the wire on a crit­i­cal FDA de­ci­sion

As Bloomberg notes, most of the Wall Street analysts that cover Sarepta $SRPT are an upbeat bunch, ready to cheer on the team when it comes to their Duchenne MD drugs, or offer explanations when an odd setback occurs — as happened recently with a safety signal that was ‘erroneously’ reported last week.

Ritu Baral Cowen
Endpoints News

Basic subscription required

Unlock this story instantly and join 57,600+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

UP­DAT­ED: No­var­tis spin­off Nabri­va fi­nal­ly scores its first an­tibi­ot­ic ap­proval

In May, Nabriva Therapeutics suffered a setback after the FDA rejected its antibiotic for complicated urinary tract infections — the Novartis spinoff has now had some better luck with the US agency, which on Monday approved its other drug for community-acquired bacterial pneumonia.

The drug, lefamulin, has been developed as an intravenous and oral formulation and been tested in two late-stage clinical trials. The semi-synthetic compound, whose dosing can be switched between the two formulations, is engineered to inhibit the synthesis of bacterial protein by binding to a part of the bacterial ribosome.

Saqib Islam. CheckRare via YouTube

Spring­Works seeks $115M to push Pfiz­er drugs across fin­ish line while Sat­suma sells mi­graine play in $86M IPO

SpringWorks and Satsuma — both biotech spinouts that have closed B rounds in April — are loading up with IPO cash to boost their respective late-stage plans.
SpringWorks

Bain-backed SpringWorks is the better-known company of the two, and it’s gunning for a larger windfall of $115 million to add to $228 million from previous financings. In the process, the Stamford, CT-based team is also drawing the curtains on the partnerships it has in mind for the pair of assets it had initially licensed from Pfizer.

Mi­nor­i­ty racial groups con­tin­ue to be dis­mal­ly rep­re­sent­ed in can­cer tri­als — study

Data reveal that different racial and ethnic groups — by nature and/or nurture — can respond differently in terms of pharmacokinetics, efficacy, or safety to therapeutics, but this disparity is not necessarily accounted for in clinical trials. A fresh analysis of the last decade of US cancer drug approvals suggests the trend continues, cementing previous research that suggests oncology trials are woefully under-representative of the racial makeup of the real world.

Van­da shares slide af­ter FDA spurns their big end­point and re­jects a pitch on jet lag re­lief

Back in the spring of last year, Vanda Pharmaceuticals $VNDA served up a hot stew of mixed data for a slate of endpoints related to what they called clear evidence that their melatonin sleep drug Hetlioz (tasimelteon) could help millions of travelers suffering from jet lag.

Never mind that they couldn’t get a planned 90 people in the study, settling for 25 instead; Vanda CEO Mihael H. Polymeropoulos said they were building on a body of data to prove it would help jet-lagged patients looking for added sleep benefits. And that, they added, would be worth a major upgrade from the agency as they sought to tackle a big market.