Time to walk away from small molecules?

Quote




There was a time in small molecule drug development when low hanging fruit was abundant, not any more, likewise with biologics. I doubt that Amgen has innovative biological targets sitting on the sidelines, just waiting for a protein scientist cause they hired 200 med chemists.
 




Yeah, like there hasn't been a whole host of small biotechs with limited resources relative to Amgen's that have put small molecule therapeutics on the market in the last 10 yrs. Amgen tried to behave like a big pharma Merck "want to be" and brought shit to market. Terrible performance worth the ax now!!
 




Anonymous said:
Yeah, like there hasn't been a whole host of small biotechs with limited resources relative to Amgen's that have put small molecule therapeutics on the market in the last 10 yrs. Amgen tried to behave like a big pharma Merck "want to be" and brought shit to market. Terrible performance worth the ax now!!
Click to expand...

How many is a "host", what blockbusters are you refering to that have been generated by these small startups? What has Amgen done in the last 10years in r and d period? Where are all the biologics blockbusters you seem to think are just waiting in the wings?
 




Anonymous said:
How many is a "host", what blockbusters are you refering to that have been generated by these small startups? What has Amgen done in the last 10years in r and d period? Where are all the biologics blockbusters you seem to think are just waiting in the wings?
Click to expand...

There is a point in your argument.

I worked in Amgen's large molecules before laid off today. But I know there are pretty good MedChem (from my last (last) company who had contributed to the pipeline there) joined Amgen about 7 yrs ago. But he is not in a position of influence here.

The process selecting molecules is interesting, more in tune milestone needs than a real MedChem hard look. It is not surprising when you are led by an academic or some one cruising fast lane on Coattails in the industry.

Tom Boone developed large molecules for Amgen. Does anybody know what he is doing ? Have he moved on to another company ?
 




Anonymous said:
How many is a "host", what blockbusters are you refering to that have been generated by these small startups? What has Amgen done in the last 10years in r and d period? Where are all the biologics blockbusters you seem to think are just waiting in the wings?
Click to expand...

Nplate, Prolia, Xgeva

Amgen CR&D = JOKE!
Amgen Protein Science = profit and sustainable pipeline - at least it did before today's myopic action by the worst management in the industry.
 




It's sad to see the animosity between small molecules and large molecules. Yes, this is (was?) the worlds best protein sciences company. But we are team mates working together for a common goal.

The really sad part is that on a day that many of our friends were let go, we announce the hiring of someone who will make a salary equivalent to 30 of those let go - lets see how he will advance our mission of serving patients.
 








There are plenty of candidates in both LM and SM. The issue here is the bottleneck in clinical trials. Each molecule must undergo the market research gauntlet before being green-lighted for trials. The funding for trials is severly limited because it must come from the R&D budget. How many times has R&D management said that a program is "shelved" due to lack of funding for trials. Maybe Amgen shouldn't develop every molecule, but since about 2006 they haven't even tried to push anything that wasn't a sure-fire blockbuster. They have no interest in earning meager returns. Amgen owns the IP for many candidates for different grievous illnesses, but refuses to invest in developing those that would detract from the current high average rate of return. They have a decades worth of clinical candidates stacked neatly in the pipline waiting for the availability of funds. They also have decades worth of funds sitting off-shore waiting for a tax holiday. My guess is that if they were allowed to repatriate some of those funds tax free, they would immediately begin all the new clinical trials they could afford. Right now it doesn't make financial sense to fund those trials, so they are being spread out very thinly over time. The recent layoffs in R&D are just the result of having an over-full pipeline and not needing more discoveries to "shelve" for 10 years until they can afford the trials. Management is too risk averse to attempt to develop anything but the highest return drug candidates. If they really cared about patients, they would find a way to bring more of the "marginal" candidates to trial sooner. Attempting to maximize percentage yeild at the expense of limiting growth in marginal earnings will be the death of this company. You lose the talent, you lose the expertise, and you eventually lose the ability to grow at all. Have fun managing the corporate contraction in the future.

The acquisition of new molecules (IP) was previously funded outside of the research budget. Not anymore, all acquisitions of companies for their IP will be funded from the research budget. Next time you hear about an acquision, dust off your resume if you work in R&D. That money came out of your operating budget. Has Amgen ever gotten a deal on IP? Come to think of it, have any large biotech or pharma company with a fat pile of cash ever gotten a good deal on IP? Please post a list to refresh my memory.

You can't manage a company to hit specific financial targets without taking your eyes off of the fundamentals. The recently announced 4 year finacial targets may sould great to wallstreet. The result of the actions needed to meet those targets is going to be hell for all the employees who don't understand that the goals have changed and no one told them. In all fairness, Amgen should change the mission statement to "maximize sharehold returns, period". Why not pull a Pfizer; lay off 99% of R&D now and save a bundle. That will look great on the bottom line for about 5 years. Until someone notices the earnings number is actually declining. Too bad, you can't hide behind percentages forever.

Growth is growth, contraction is contraction. The path forward has already been chosen. Contraction looks more profitable right now. My one wish is that management has to hold all of their shares for ten years after they vest.
 








Top Bottom
Back
Quote