Top Issues Facing Pharma (Recap from Indiana Life Sciences Forum)

I’m a medical device guy. I know enough about pharmaceuticals to be dangerous. Actually, I know very little. My knowledge and understanding of the pharma industry increased exponentially today during the Indiana Life Sciences Forum. One of the panels was focused on Big Pharma:

Panel: Big Pharma – What are the Big Pharmas going to look like and what does that mean for the rest of us?

  • Sidney Taurel, Chairman Emeritus, Eli Lilly and Company (Confirmed)
  • William Ringo, SVP, Strategy and Business Development, Pfizer (Confirmed)
  • Jas Gidda, VP of Research and Development, Marcadia Biotech (Confirmed)
  • Matthew K. Hudes, National Managing Principal, Biotechnology, Life Sciences & Health Care, Deloitte LLP (Confirmed)
  • Moderated by:  G. Steven Burrill, CEO, Burrill & Company (Confirmed)
The closing comments from each panelist addressed the top issues big pharma needs to face in the next 10 years. Here are some of the responses:
Ringo
  • Change public perception of the pharmaceutical industry. Public perceives 60% of healthcare costs comes from pharma. In reality, it’s closer to 12%.
  • Improve productivity of research & development.
  • Figure out how to capitalize in emerging markets with established products.
Taurel
  • Improve the worldwide climate for innovation
  • Address market-based demands instead of cost-based demands
  • Establish regulatory standards / approaches for personalized medicine.
  • Adapt approach for patient outcomes.
  • Change internal thinking at big pharma companies from “ways to generate most revenue” to “what is best for the patient”.
Gidda
  • Focus on patient first.
  • Research & development.
  • Change public perception.
Hudes
  • Reform healthcare.
  • Increase mergers & acquisitions. Increase R&D.
  • Advancement of biosimilars and generics.
  • Increase spending and development in healthcare IT. $31B allocated by federal government that could be tapped by life science R&D.
Burrill
  • Change viewpoint from U.S. centric to more of a world view. Rest of world operates on single-payer system (governments).
  • Foster and finance innovation.
The panel was a group of heavy hitters in pharma. What I found most interesting about the discussion:
  1. A great deal of the discussion was about lowering costs. None mentioned value explicitly.
  2. Why hasn’t pharma ALWAYS had a patient first focus?
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Some Tweets From Indiana Life Sciences Forum

I attended today’s Indiana Life Sciences Forum sponsored by Burrill & Company and BioCrossroads. I’ll have more posts soon about the event. During the conference, I decided to tweet updates. Here is a list of my tweets:

  • #INLifeSciencesForum- Burrill: “chronic disease accounts for 80% of healthcare costs”
  • #INLifeSciencesForum Does biotech provide link between pharma & med device?
  • #INLifeSciencesForum Pharma panel talking about lower costs & innovation. None discussed value.
  • #INLifeSciencesForum half the room left prior to the BioGreentech panel. Why lump everything under “life sciences”?
  • “Made to Stick” talks about concreteness. This #INLifeSciencesForum session is not concrete. I cannot fathom 36B gallons?
  • #INLifeSciencesForum Moderator of BioGreentech has messed up names of all panel members.
  • #INLifeSciencesForum #BioCrossroads to have announcement soon regarding investment capital for #Indiana life sciences
  • Gus Watanabe Life Sciences Champion of the Year: Richard Dimarki #INLifeSciencesForum
  • #INLifeSciencesForum D. Peterson: Everything Cook Medical does has to be value-creating for the patient
  • #INLifeSciencesForum Med device healthcare “tax” is disproportionate compared to pharma & other segments

Was the conference worth the $250 + $25 for parking? I’ll write some blog posts. Maybe a few ideas. But, not really worth the price of admission.

BTW – I only found one other tweet from today’s conference:

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]