PHARMACEUTICAL PARTNERSHIPS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF NEW PHARMACEUTICALS

This article examines the causes for creating alliances between manufacturers and drug developers. The attention has also been paid to the classification of such partnerships depending on the level of integration. The classification is necessary for further study of relations in the alliances. It is important to understand how economically effective and justified such partnerships are. The aim of the study is to determine the reasons for creating partnerships between drug developers and manufacturers, and to work out a classification of partnerships in the field of pharmacology. Materials and methods. The study analyzes existing alliances, partnerships of Big Pharma companies such as Bayer AG, Merck & Co, Pfizer. Results and discussion. The variety of forms of partnerships allows all participants in this market to get from cooperation the benefits they need. Some seek to reduce risk, others look forward to gaining access to new research opportunities, the third seek to share knowledge for greater productivity. However, there is always the opposite side, they have to sacrifice something to get a market advantage. For example, increased integration leads to a reduction in the risk of drug creation, but also leads to a decrease in the company’s independence. Conclusion. The results of this study can be used later in the study of the financial effectiveness of pharmaceutical partnerships, as well as in exploring the causes of alliances’ collapses. Any partnership has its value and can be considered as an intangible asset of the company. However, at the moment, there is no universal way of assessing this type of active assets, therefore, classification is a key step in creating a model for determining the value of a partnership.

1. Hammonds T. Academic–Pharma drug discovery alliances: seeking ways to eliminate the valley of death. Future. 2015;7(14):1891–9. DOI: 10.4155/fmc.15.111

2. Gueth A. Entering into an alliance with big pharma. [Internet]. Pharmaceutical Technology. 2001;25(10): 132–8. [cited 2017 Dec 10]. Available from: http://di.typepad.com/opentto/free_papers/Pharmaceutical_Technology_-_ October_2001.pdf

3. Hagedoorn J. Inter-firm R&D partnerships: an overview of major trends and patterns since 1960. Research policy. 2002 May;31(4):477–92. DOI: 10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00120-2

4. Saci F, Jasimuddin SM. Does strategic partnership matter to create value of a firm? An empirical study based on SBF 250 French firms. Research in International Business and Finance. 2017. DOI: 10.1016/j.ribaf.2017.10.002

5. Doz YL, Hamel G. Alliance advantage: The art of creating value through partnering. Harvard Business Press; 1998.

6. Gottinger HW, Umali CL. Strategic alliances in global biotech pharma industries. The Open Business Journal. 2008; 1(1): 10–24.

7. Duffy RS. Towards a better understanding of partnership attributes: An exploratory analysis of relationship type classification. Industrial Marketing Management. 2008;37(2): 228–44. DOI: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2007.09.005

8. Pun H, Ghamat S. The value of partnership under competition: When competitors may be R&D joint-venture and supply-chain partners for a critical component. International Journal of Production Economics. 2016;177:1–11. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.03.018

9. Global Data [Database]. [Internet]. [cited 2017 Dec 10]. Available from: https://www.globaldata.com/healthcare/ research-areas/pharmaceutical/deals-insights/

10. The Statistics Portal “Statista”. [Internet]. [cited 2017 Aug 10]. Available from: www.statista.com

11. Goldman Sachs. Strategic alliances in biotechnology. Goldman Sachs Global Equity Research. New York; 2005.

12. Ernst & Young. Beyond Borders: The Global Biotechnology Report; 2017.

13. Etapy razrabotki novykh lekarstvennykh preparatov [Stages of developing new medicines]. [Internet]. [cited 2017 Dec 10]. Available from: http://valeologija.ru/lekcii/lekcii-po-omz/470-etapy-razrabotki-novyx-lekarstvennyx-preparatov. Russian.

14. Brothers L. The fruits of genomics. New York: Lehman Brothers. 2001:24, 83.

15. Varian HR. Intermediate Microeconomics: A Modern Approach. Ninth International Student Edition. WW Norton & Company; 2014.

16. Reyting krupneyshikh farmatsevticheskikh kompaniy mira [Rating of the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world]. [Internet]. [cited 2017 Dec 10]. Available from: http://basetop.ru/reyting-krupneyshih-farmatsevticheskih-kompaniy-mira/ Russian.

17. Tyebjee T, Hardin J. Biotech–pharma alliances: Strategies, structures and financing. Journal of commercial biotechnology. 2004;10(4): 329–39.

18. Reuer JJ, Devarakonda R. Partner Selection in R&D Collaborations: Effects of Affiliations with Venture Capitalists. Organization Science. 2017.

19. Partnerstva kompanii Bayer [Partnerships of the Bayer company]. [Internet]. [cited 2017 Dec 10]. Available from: https://pharma.bayer.com/en/innovation-partnering/partnering/selected-partnerships/ Russian.

20. Reyting innovatsionnykh kompaniy «TekhUspekh» [Rating of innovative companies “TechUspech”]. [Internet]. [cited 2017 Dec 10]. Available from: http://www.ratingtechup.ru/rate/2017/2056/ Russian.

21. Sajt kompanii Geropharm [The site of the GEROPHARM company]. [Internet]. [cited 2017 Dec 10]. Available from: http://www.geropharm.ru/partners/international_cooperation/ Russian.

22. Pfizer v Rossii [Pfizer in Russia]. [Internet]. [cited 2017 Dec 10]. Available from: https://www.pfizer.ru/node/6531 Russian.

23. Bayer v Rossii [Bayer in Russia]. [Internet]. [cited 2017 Dec 10]. Available from: https://www.bayer.ru/about/ history-russia/ Russian.

24. Adegbesan JA, Higgins MJ. The intra-alliance division of value created through collaboration. Strategic Management Journal. 2011;32(2):187–211.

25. Guo D, Guo Y, Jiang K. Government-subsidized R&D and firm innovation: Evidence from China. Research policy. 2016;45(6):1129–44.

26. Honjo Y, Nagaoka S. Initial public offering and financing of biotechnology start-ups: Evidence from Japan. [Inter-net]. 2015. [cited 2017 Dec 10] Available from: http://hermes-ir.lib.hit-u.ac.jp/rs/bitstream/10086/27491/1/070iir-WP15-20.pdf

27. Frolova VB. Strategicheskiye oriyentiry prinyatiya resheniya po Initial Public Offering [Strategic reference points for the decision on Initial Public Offering]. Kontsept. 2015;10: 121–5. Russian.

28. Aslanov DI, Larionova AA. Mezhdunarodnyye strategicheskiye al’yansy [International strategic alliances]. [In-ternet]. Simvol nauki. 2016; 2(2). [cited 2017 Dec 10]. Available from: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/strategicheskie-orientiry-prinyatiya-resheniya-po-initial-public-offering

29. Sajt soyuza “Mediko-farmacevticheskie proekty. XXI vek” [The site of the Union “Medico-Pharmaceutical Projects, XXI Century”]. [Internet]. [cited 2017 Dec 10]. Available from: http://21mpp.ru. Russian.

30. Sajt soyuza farmacevticheskih i biomedicinskih klasterov [The website of the Union of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Clusters]. [Internet]. [cited 2017 Dec 10]. Available from: http://farmunion.ru/

31. Hart O, Holmstrom B. A theory of firm scope. The Quarterly Journal of Economics. 2010;125(2):483–513.

32. Yevstratov АV. Issledovaniye protsessov sliyaniy i pogloshcheniy kompaniy na mirovom farmatsevticheskom rynke [Research of mergers and acquisitions of companies in the world pharmaceutical market]. Vestnik of Samara State University of Economics. 2016;3(137):32–3. Russian.