Lessons from Lipitor and the broken blockbuster drug model

Abstract

Pfizer's LDL cholesterol-lowering atorvastatin (Lipitor) defines what it means to be a blockbuster drug. Patented in 1997, it has raked in around US$130 billion for Pfizer during its 14 years on the market, making it the world's bestselling drug of all time. Indeed, Pfizer's business model has relied on the huge profits from Lipitor and a few other blockbuster drugs. But things are set to change. The patent for Lipitor expired on Nov 30.Pfizer will undoubtedly feel the loss of Lipitor sales. It has been planning for this schismatic change for several years. In the past, the company has claimed that it can maintain huge research and development expenditures despite the increasing rarity of new blockbuster drugs. But this year it has already announced closure of its research site at Sandwich, Kent, UK, let go of most of its 2400 staff, and plans a decrease of $1·5 billion from its proposed 2012 research and development spend.The trouble Pfizer finds itself in is a lesson well taken by the drug industry. No company today has the capacity for the aggressive marketing of a few blockbuster drugs as well as substantial research and development. The blockbuster business model is broken, and it has been for some time. The industry has a history of over-reliance on patented drugs with inadequate investment in the drug pipeline. SmithKline, for example, failed to reinvest the proceeds of its successful stomach ulcer drug Tagamet (cimetidine) in research and was forced to merge with Beecham in 1989.A new business model for industry must mean much closer collaboration with universities and academic medical science. The collaboration promoted in the UK Government's new £180 million strategy to boost innovation in the life sciences announced this week is one example. This model of partnership drove drug discovery in the 1970s and 1980s, but the great success of pharma induced industry leaders to lose their collective memory. The difficulties industry now faces are an opportunity to put the leadership of big pharmaceutical companies back in the hands of scientists who understand that business success comes not from aggressive and sometimes unethical sales and marketing, but from judicious exchange between scientists in different sectors and a greater sense of solidarity with the societies they serve. Pfizer's LDL cholesterol-lowering atorvastatin (Lipitor) defines what it means to be a blockbuster drug. Patented in 1997, it has raked in around US$130 billion for Pfizer during its 14 years on the market, making it the world's bestselling drug of all time. Indeed, Pfizer's business model has relied on the huge profits from Lipitor and a few other blockbuster drugs. But things are set to change. The patent for Lipitor expired on Nov 30. Pfizer will undoubtedly feel the loss of Lipitor sales. It has been planning for this schismatic change for several years. In the past, the company has claimed that it can maintain huge research and development expenditures despite the increasing rarity of new blockbuster drugs. But this year it has already announced closure of its research site at Sandwich, Kent, UK, let go of most of its 2400 staff, and plans a decrease of $1·5 billion from its proposed 2012 research and development spend. The trouble Pfizer finds itself in is a lesson well taken by the drug industry. No company today has the capacity for the aggressive marketing of a few blockbuster drugs as well as substantial research and development. The blockbuster business model is broken, and it has been for some time. The industry has a history of over-reliance on patented drugs with inadequate investment in the drug pipeline. SmithKline, for example, failed to reinvest the proceeds of its successful stomach ulcer drug Tagamet (cimetidine) in research and was forced to merge with Beecham in 1989. A new business model for industry must mean much closer collaboration with universities and academic medical science. The collaboration promoted in the UK Government's new £180 million strategy to boost innovation in the life sciences announced this week is one example. This model of partnership drove drug discovery in the 1970s and 1980s, but the great success of pharma induced industry leaders to lose their collective memory. The difficulties industry now faces are an opportunity to put the leadership of big pharmaceutical companies back in the hands of scientists who understand that business success comes not from aggressive and sometimes unethical sales and marketing, but from judicious exchange between scientists in different sectors and a greater sense of solidarity with the societies they serve.