Antibody Technologies and Attrition Rates – an industry analysis 2013

Publisher: La Merie Publishing
Pages: 607
Format: PDF
Product Line:
LMP Full Report
Product Code: LMFR0007
Release Date: March of 2013

2,150.00 €
Free of 19 % VAT (except in Germany and also in the European Union without valid intl. VAT no),
Delivery costs do not apply or are included.
License:
You can also order this product via email or fax , please download the Order Form
Need more information?
Ask a question about this product

Antibody Technologies and Attrition Rates – an industry analysis 2013

Product Description 

The report “Antibody Technologies and Attrition Rates – an industry analysis 2013” is based on the identification of the antibody generation technologies of 504 naked antibodies in clinical or market stages. Information was retrieved from scientific and corporate publications as well as from patent and legal literature. The report provides descriptive statistics of the 504 naked antibodies and their status during the study period of January 1, 2013 to February 28, 2013. The antibodies are categorized as active during the study period or discontinued during or before the study period. Attrition rates were calculated across a number of variables.

Descriptive statistics of the 504 naked antibodies include the following variables:

  • Unique antibody identifiers (drug codes; generic name; brand name)
  • Antibody format (full length, Fab, scFv, VH/VL, nanobody, bispecific, cocktail/polyclonal)
  • In vitro antibody generation technologies (display technologies from CAT, Dyax, Morphosys, BioInvent, Domantis, Genentech, others)
  • In vivo antibody generation technologies (chimeric, primatized, nanobodies, deimmunized, human engineered, humaneered, humanized, XenoMouse, HuMab mouse, KM mouse, VelocImmune mouse, human B-cell derived)
  • Animal species of parental wild-type antibody (mouse, rat, rabbit, hamster, cynomolgus monkey, camelid)
  • Antibody status (active/discontinued)
  • Year of failure
  • Reason for failure (efficacy, pharmacokinetics/ADME; safety; technical, business, next generation, inactivity)
  • Target
  • Immunoglobulin class and IgG isotype
  • Highest phase
  • Therapeutic area of lead indication
  • Companies (developer, licensor/originator)

An Antibody Data Sheet was prepared for each unique antibody containing the retrieved information and the source of information in the form of a scientific reference or a hyperlink leading to the website from which the information was obtained.
The analysis essentially evaluated the question whether there are differences in clinical attrition rates between in vitro and in vivo antibody generation technologies as well as within the different in vitro and in antibody generation technologies. Attrition rate was defined as the percentage of failed antibodies of all active and inactive antibodies.

Benefits from the data and the analysis: 

  • Understand the historical and present state of the art use of antibody technologies;
  • Learn the success rate of each antibody generation technology;
  • Understand the reasons for failure of antibodies in clinical development;
  • Appreciate the relative value of generic and of IP protected antibody technologies;
  • Know which antibody technologies are using your competitors;
  • Know the preferred antibody formats, IgG isotypes, development indications, parental wild-type animal species.
  • Learn the influence of the target for the success rate of the selected antibody technology.

For analysis of the data, an Excel Sheet was prepared facilitating the descriptive statistical evaluation. Buyers of the full report can acquire the Excel Sheet at an additional modest cost (single user: € 500.-; site license: € 1,000.-; and global license: € 1,500.-). Please contact us at sales@lamerie.com 

Donwload sample pages: Antibody technologies and attrition rates - an industry analysis 2013 

Antibody Technologies and Attrition Rates – an industry analysis 2013

Table of Contents

1 Executive Summary and Discussion         
2 Introduction           
3 Methodology          
4 Results
        
4.1   Use of antibody technologies   
4.2   Attrition rates    
4.3   Reasons for failure        
4.4   Antibody generation technologies and targets
4.5   Antibody technologies and antibody formats 
4.6   Parental animal species of in vivo generated antibodies         
4.7   Immunoglobulin class and isotype vs. antibody technology   
4.8   Antibody technology and therapeutic areas    
4.9   Attrition rates of antibodies in therapeutic areas         
4.10  Benchmark analysis: big pharma and biotech antibody technology preferences and attrition rates 
5 Tables         
Table 1            Overall attrition rate of in vitro generated antibodies
Table 2            Overall attrition rate of in vivo generated antibodies
Table 3            Highest phase of active antibodies generated by in vitro technologies
Table 4            Highest phase of active antibodies generated by in vivo technologies
Table 5            Year of antibody failure for in vitro generated antibodies
Table 6            Year of antibody failure for in vivo generated antibodies
Table 7            Attrition rate of in vitro generated antibodies in the period 2006-2013
Table 8            Attrition rate of in vivo generated antibodies in the period 2006-2013
Table 9            Highest phase of failed antibodies generated by in vitro technologies
Table 10          Highest phase of failed antibodies generated by in vivo technologies
Tables 11        Reasons for failure of antibodies generated by in vitro technologies
Tables 12        Reasons for failure of antibodies generated by in vivo technologies
Table 13          Reasons for failure of humanized antibodies per phase
Tables 14        Targets of failed in vitro generated antibodies per technology
Tables 15        Targets vs. in vitro and in vivo antibody generation technologies
Tables 16        Transgenic mouse antibodies and targets
Table 17          Antibody technologies and antibody formats
Table 18          Parental animal species of in vivo generated antibodies
Table 19          Immunoglobulin class and isotype vs antibody technology
Table 20          In vitro antibody technology and therapeutic areas
Table 21          In vivo antibody technology and therapeutic areas
Table 22          Failed antibodies from in vitro technologies vs therapeutic areas
Table 23          Failed antibodies from in vivo technologies vs therapeutic areas
Table 24          Roche (Genentech(Chugai) use of antibody technologies vs attrition rates
Table 25          AstraZeneca (MedImmune/CAT) use of antibody technologies vs attrition rates
Table 26          Amgen use of antibody technologies vs attrition rates
Table 27          Lilly (ImClone) use of antibody technologies vs attrition rates
Table 28          Pfizer (Wyeth) use of antibody technologies vs attrition rates
Table 29          Novartis use of antibody technologies vs attrition rates
Table 30          GlaxoSmithKline (HGS) use of antibody technologies vs attrition rates
Table 31          Sanofi (Genzyme) use of antibody technologies vs attrition rates
Table 32          Bristol-Myers Squibb (Medarex) use of antibody technologies vs attrition rates
Table 33          Biogen Idec use of antibody technologies vs attrition rates
Table 34          Janssen (Centocor/J&J) use of antibody technologies vs attrition rates
Table 35          AbbVie (Abbott) use of antibody technologies vs attrition rates
Table 36          Kyowa Hakko Kirin Pharma use of antibody technologies vs attrition rates
Table 37          Merck (Schering-Plough) use of antibody technologies vs attrition rates
Table 38          UCB (Celltech) use of antibody technologies vs attrition rates
Table 39          Eisai (Morphotek) use of antibody technologies vs attrition rates
Table 40          Novo Nordisk use of antibody technologies vs attrition rates
Table 41          Ranking list of Big Pharma & Biotech companies and overall antibody attrition rates
Table 42          Ranking list of Big Pharma & Biotech companies and in vitro antibody attrition rates
Table 43          Ranking list of Big Pharma & Biotech companies and in vivo antibody attrition rates
Table 44          Ranking list of Big Pharma & Biotech companies and in vivo antibody preference rate
Table 45          Big Pharma & Biotech companies and preferred in vivo antibody technologies: humanization vs. transgenic mice
6 Addendum: Antibody Data Sheets



The above shown price refers to a Single User License. Please contact us for prices of departmental, site or global product licenses.

This Report is NOT a downloadable item but will be delivered via email within 24 h (working days only).

La Merie Biologics

FREE Weekly News Bulletin

2016 Sales ofAntibodies & Proteins

New Product Alert

For La Merie Publishing

Top