1. ISA’s Food and
Pharmaceutical Division
2nd
Process Analytical
Technology Conference
May 16, 2006
Standards
Certification
Education & Training
Publishing
Conferences & Exhibits
By Mike Nager
2. Source: ISA Roster
ISA’s Food and Pharmaceutical
Division – Key Benefits
Over 1600 automation professionals in the
Pharmaceutical, Food, and Packaged Consumer
Products fields.
Key issues of validation, PAT, packaging safety,
aseptic processing, clean rooms, cGMPs. Also:
• Peer and Business Networking
• Education and Professional Development
4. 75% → Pharma revenue to face generic competition
(Datamonitor)
70% → Drugs that won’t recoup development costs
(PHRMA)
40% → Equipment Utilization Rate (FDA)
25% → Manufacturing costs as part of revenue (FDA)
18% → Pharma profit margin vs 4.5% for CPG (FDA)
15% → Utilization level of manufacturing cap. (FDA)
5-15% → Scrap Rate(IQPC) @ $3.5M/batch(AMR)
Pharmaceutical Industry
Where are we today?
6. 0 2 4 6 8 10
Cox-2 Inhibitors 1999
Invirase 1995
Rocombinate 1992
Difulcan 1990
Mevacor 1987
AZT 1987
Seldane 1985
Prozac 1985
Capoten 1980
Tagemet 1977
Inderal 1968
Top Line Pressure from Competition
& Generics – End of the Blockbuster
(PWC Consulting)
7. $49B → 2004 R&D Spending (PHRMA)
$25B → ’00-’04 Lost Revenue Patent expiration (Forrester)
$15B → 2005 Lost Revenue Patent expiration (Forrester)
$30B → Lost Revenue due counterfeiting (WHO)
$16B → 2005 Free Samples (PHRMA)
1.2B → Average number of records per company (IMS)
Bottom Line Erosion
Profits under Pressure
9. 200 → Days of inventory in pharma supply chain (AMR
Research)
60 → Days of inventory in CPG supply chain (AMR
Research)
25 → Average number of transfer points in supply
chain between manufacturer and consumer (IMS)
Pharmaceutical Industry
Numbers
11. 74% → Execs who believe the need to improve
operational excellence is paramount (MBT Magazine)
$12.5M → Amount a $5B pharma company will save
by reducing manufacturing costs 1%( MBT Magazine)
$4.6B → Savings of top 10 pharma companies if
improved from 2.5 Sigma to 5.5 Sigma (faster to market,
faster inventory turns and capital cost reductions) ( Phillipe Cini, Tunnell Consulting)
$10B → Savings top 30 companies would save by
achieving 4.5 Sigma (IBM)
Savings Potentials
14. It’s a system to understand and control
the manufacturing process, which is
consistent with our current drug quality
system: quality cannot be tested into
products; it should be built-in or should
be by design.
Source: FDA
Why Process Analytical
Technology?
15. ISA has the expertise to help
pharmaceutical and biotech companies
increase manufacturing efficiencies to
meet today’s market challenges of
increasing costs and downward
pressure on sales.
Conclusion
16. • Process Analyzers and sensors to provide
process ‘signatures’
• Process Control used to ‘steer’ final products
towards their desirable end-points
• Multivariate mathematical tools for simulation,
statistical design, pattern recognition
• Knowledge Management for continuous
process improvement
The Four Tools of P.A.T.
Now Alex Habib will introduce P.A.T.
Hinweis der Redaktion
In 2006, China is the only top ten market that has double digit growth (23%).
Pharmaceutical industry for decades relied on the ‘Blockbuster’ sales model. Come out with a great new drug, and sales pays for the company. A few years later repeat.
These sales were expected to pay for all the costs and profits. They were also expected to ‘cover’ for inefficient manufacturing processes and yield rates.
This business model is now realized to be unsustainable. Block buster drugs are getting much harder to develop and fewer useful new chemical entities (NCEs) are being discovered. So at the bottom fewer block busters are entering the market.
Competition is eating away at top line sales at a tremendous rate undermining the model. It is clear that pharma has to improve its operational efficiencies in order to survive.
Part of the high costs of the pharma business is high levels of inventory.
From an examination of some key statistics, it would appear that the FDA’s effort
is paying off. Inspections are down from 4,392 in 1999 to 2,965 in 2003,10 recalls
are down from 471 in 2000 to 266 in 2004 and warning letters are down from 58 in
2002 to 30 in 2004.11 However if we look behind these statistics, a different picture
emerges. There are fewer inspections as a consequence of the FDA’s risk-based
approach and systems-based inspections. Warning letters are down since the
quality systems approach works to issue a single encompassing letter in place of
multiple product- or operation-specific warnings. Finally, while the absolute number
of recalls is down, the ratio of development to manufacturing issues has doubled
from 1:4 to 1:2, indicating the true source of poor quality performance (see Table 1).
So while there have been improvements in quality, these have been achieved
through increased efforts in “testing to document quality.”12 This approach to quality
carries a significant cost for superficial improvement, is not sustainable and is simply
not feasible for the new, complex products in the pipeline.
IBM