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. 

Eli Lilly CEO David Ricks (Evan Vucci/AP Images)

A P val­ue of 0.38? NE­JM re­sults raise new ques­tions for Eli Lil­ly's vaunt­ed Covid an­ti­body

Generally, a P value of 0.38 means your drug failed and by a fair margin. Depending on the company, the compound and the trial, it might mean the end of the program. It could trigger layoffs.

For Eli Lilly, though, it was part of the key endpoint on a trial that landed them a $1.2 billion deal with the US government to supply up to nearly 1 million Covid-19 antibodies.

So what does one make of that? Was the endpoint not so important, as Lilly maintains? Or did the US government promise a princely sum for a pedestrian drug?

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 92,800+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Noubar Afeyan, Flagship founder and CEO (Victor Boyko/Getty Images)

UP­DAT­ED: Flag­ship launch­es Sen­da Bio­sciences with $88M in back­ing, look­ing to pi­o­neer the field of 'In­ter­sys­tems Bi­ol­o­gy'

Flagship Pioneering has a fresh company out this week, one that aims to lay the groundwork for a whole new discipline.

Senda Biosciences launched Wednesday with $88 million in Flagship cash. The goal? Gain insights into the molecular connections between people and coevolved nonhuman species like plants and bacteria, paving the way for “Intersystems Biology.”

Guillaume Pfefer has been tapped to run the show, a 25-year biotech veteran who comes from GSK after leading the development of the company’s shingles vaccine.

Daphne Koller, Getty

Bris­tol My­er­s' Richard Har­g­reaves pays $70M to launch a neu­rode­gen­er­a­tion al­liance with a star play­er in the ma­chine learn­ing world

Bristol Myers Squibb is turning to one of the star upstarts in the machine learning world to go back to the drawing board and come up with the disease models needed to find drugs that can work against two of the toughest targets in the neuro world.

Daphne Koller’s well-funded insitro is getting $70 million in cash and near-term milestones to use their machine learning platform to create induced pluripotent stem cell-derived disease models for ALS and frontotemporal dementia.

Eli Lilly CEO David Ricks at the Rose Garden, May 26, 2020 (Evan Vucci/AP Images)

Eli Lil­ly lines up a block­buster deal for Covid-19 an­ti­body, right af­ter it failed a NI­AID tri­al

Two days after Eli Lilly conceded that its antibody bamlanivimab was a flop in hospitalized Covid-19 patients, the US government is preparing to make it a blockbuster.

The pharma giant reported early Wednesday that it struck a deal to supply the feds with 300,000 vials of the drug at a cost of $375 million — once it gets an EUA stamp from the FDA. And once that 2-month supply deal is done, the government has an option on another 650,000 doses on the same terms — which could potentially add another $812 million.

Konstantin Poukalov

Per­cep­tive re­cruits A-list in­vestors to back its in-house Chi­na start­up with a mam­moth $310M raise

It took two years for Perceptive Advisors to conceive and boot up LianBio, its big bet on a new kind of in-licensing model for China, seeding it with enough cash to set up two anchoring deals with MyoKardia and BridgeBio. The result was a startup that was all ready to go, reaping $310 million just a little over two months after official launch.

Homegrown Chinese biotechs — many of them boasting of US ties and execs with overseas credentials — have been raking in mega-venture rounds in 2020, both from influential local backers and overseas VC firms that have been loading up new cash. As with IPOs, the deal flow might be slower but the amounts are often more staggering. LianBio’s latest round, unusually, is branded both a Series A and crossover.

Ar­cus and As­traZeneca part­ner on a high stakes an­ti-TIG­IT/PD-L1 PhI­II can­cer study, look­ing to im­prove on a stan­dard of care

For AstraZeneca, the PACIFIC trial in Stage III non-small cell lung cancer remains one of the big triumphs for AstraZeneca’s oncology R&D group. It not only made their PD-L1 Imfinzi a franchise player with a solid advance in a large niche of the lung cancer market, the study — which continues to offer data on the long-range efficacy of their drug — also helped salve the vicious sting of the failure of the CTLA-4 combo in the MYSTIC study.

No­var­tis buys a new gene ther­a­py for vi­sion loss, and this is one pre­clin­i­cal ven­ture that did­n't come cheap

Cyrus Mozayeni got excited when he began to explore the academic work of Ehud Isacoff and John G. Flannery at UC Berkeley.

Together, they were engaged in finding a gene therapy approach to pan-genotypic vision restoration in patients with photoreceptor-based blindness, potentially restoring the vision of a broad group of patients. And they did it by using a vector to deliver the genetic sequence for light sensing proteins.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 92,800+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

CMO Merdad Parsey (Gilead)

Gilead hits the brakes on a tri­fec­ta of mid- and late-stage stud­ies for their trou­bled fil­go­tinib pro­gram. It's up to the FDA now

Gilead $GILD execs haven’t decided exactly what to do with filgotinib in the wake of the slapdown at the FDA on their rheumatoid arthritis application, but they’re taking a time out for a slate of studies until they can gain some clarity from the agency. And without encouraging guidance, this drug could clearly be axed from the pipeline.

In their Q3 report out Wednesday afternoon, the company says researchers have “paused” a Phase III study for psoriatic arthritis along with a pair of Phase II trials for ankylosing spondylitis and uveitis. Late-stage studies for ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s are continuing, but you can see for yourself how big a hole this leaves in the inflammatory disease pipeline, with obvious implications if the company abandons filgo altogether.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 92,800+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.

Patrick Soon-Shiong at the JP Morgan Healthcare Conference, Jan. 13, 2020 (David Paul Morris/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Af­ter falling be­hind the lead­ers, dissed by some ex­perts, biotech show­man Patrick Soon-Sh­iong fi­nal­ly gets his Covid-19 vac­cine ready for a tri­al. But can it live up to the hype?

In January, when dozens of scientists rushed to start making a vaccine for the then-novel coronavirus, they were joined by an unlikely compatriot: Patrick Soon-Shiong, the billionaire doctor most famous for making big, controversial promises on cancer research.

Soon-Shiong had spent the last 4 years on his “Cancer Moonshot,” but part of his project meant buying a small Seattle biotech that specialized in making common-cold vectors, called adenoviruses, to train the immune system. The billionaire had been using those vectors for oncology, but the company had also developed vaccine candidates for H1N1, Lassa fever and other viruses. When the outbreak began, he pivoted.

Endpoints News

Keep reading Endpoints with a free subscription

Unlock this story instantly and join 92,800+ biopharma pros reading Endpoints daily — and it's free.