Transcript Slide 1

Case Study
Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI)
Karen Strandgaard
EFPIA
EuroConference, Brussels April 26th, 2006
1
The European Federation of Pharmaceutical
Industries and Associations (EFPIA)

EFPIA represents the research-based pharmaceutical
industry operating in Europe:
–
45 leading pharmaceutical companies,
–
29 national pharmaceutical industry associations

It also has two specialised groups;
–
Emerging Biopharmaceutical Enterprises (EBE), an
association representing the needs and interests of
biopharmaceutical companies
–
European Vaccine Manufacturers (EVM), an
association representing the needs and interests of
vaccine manufacturers
2
The EFPIA Research Directors Group

Works to strengthen the EU Science base by:
–
Promoting the importance of research for the biopharmaceutical
industry and participating in the increasing debate on Europe’s
competitiveness in biopharmaceutical research.
–
Developing and implementing industry policy to encourage and
support of biomedical and biopharmaceutical Research and
Development activities in Europe to the benefit of patients and
society
–
Working towards goals in partnership with biomedical
stakeholders such as patients, regulators, academia, etc
Objectives relevant to the ETP concept
3
Agenda

Background on The Innovative Medicines Initiative

Challenges

Key success factors

Lessons learned
4
Agenda

Background on The Innovative Medicines Initiative

Challenges

Key success factors

Lessons learned
5
Europe losing the ‘R&D Race’:
Global biopharmaceutical R&D investment
4%
23%
US
Europe
ROW
73%
Note: Global R&D expenses of € 16,475 million (USA: 11,993; Europe: 3,742; Canada: 548; Asia/Pacific: 192)
Source: Ernst & Young, 11th Annual European Biotechnology Report 2004
6
Creating new medicines is a high risk journey
15
Medicine
Risk assessment
analysis
Gaining approval
10
Studies in 100-300
patients (Phase II)
Extensive safety studies
Studies in healthy
volunteers (Phase I)
Candidate
5
Formulations
developed
Early safety
studies
Screening
Synthesis of
compounds
years
Idea
7
The Innovative Medicines Initiative….

….. Will
–
Improve the way new medicines are created
–
Establish Public-Private-Partnerships
Enabling the discovery of new medicines for the benefit of
patients

…..Will Not
–
Deliver new medicines per se
8
IMI History

First discussion with the EC at the RDG meeting of
June 2004

First stakeholder meeting organised by the EC
October 2004

FP6 Integrated project submitted to the EC by EFPIA
November 2004

Vision paper published
December 2004

Nine stakeholder workshops
Jan.to May 2005

Review and support by the EFPIA Board

First Member States group meeting
May 2005

Strategic Research Agenda published
July 2005

Second Member States group meeting
September 2005

FP6 IP negotiations finalised and project start
October 2005

FP6 IP contract signed by EFPIA and EC
December 2005
April 2005
9
IMI - A compelling case for JTI Status

Innovation and development of science base is crucial to Europe

Health is high on the political agenda with our ageing population

Pharmaceutical innovation brings benefits to people’s health and
wealth to society

Focused on creating the environment which will enable important new
medicines to get to patients faster

IMI has a clear focus on outcomes, an agreed and proven
collaborative approach, and is ready to start implementation

Commitment of industry to contribute 100% of own costs
10
Agenda

Background on The Innovative Medicines Initiative

Challenges

Key success factors

Lessons learned
11
Main challenges

Novelty of the JTI instrument – no established way of
working

Number of stakeholders and communication between all
these stakeholders
12
Different drivers – common goal

Political orientation

Business orientation

Focus on process

Focus on productivity

Focus on consultation

Focus on science

Focus on Member States
interest

Focus on patients’ interest
Foster biomedical Innovation
13
The usual instruments are inadequate

Low industry participation

Bureaucratic and lengthy process

Lack of transparency

Focus on social agenda, i.e. balance between genders,
countries, etc. distracts from the science

Not conducive to real partnerships
JTI's can address these inadequacies
14
What is the Environment of the IMI?
EMEA & national authorities
Academia & Hospitals
Health Professionals
Patients’ organisations
Biotechs: EuropaBio, EBE
UK
Italy
Spain
France
Poland
Sweden
Germany
Etc.
SanCo
Research
Member States
European Commission
Enterprise
AZ
GSK
Bayer
Roche
Servier
Novartis
Schering
Novo-Nordisk
Sanofi-Aventis etc
RDG
Information Society
Biopharmaceutical industry
EFPIA Board
EFPIA Committees
PhRMA S&R Committees
15
Approach – Keep focus on the patients
National Governments
European Commission
SMEs
Industry
Patient
EMEA & national
authorities
Health Professionals
Academia & Hospitals
16
Agenda

Background on The Innovative Medicines Initiative

Challenges

Key success factors

Lessons learned
17
Industry will not be funded by
the EC
50%
50%
IMI to be funded equally by pharma
industry and European Commission
100%
Research performed by industry
funded by industry
100%
Research performed by public
organisations funded by EC
18
Key success factors

Constant/regular communication between EC and EFPIA
at all levels:
–
Decision level
–
Implementation level
Building understanding and trust
19
Key success factors (contd.)

Alignment of the EFPIA companies around the strategic
research agenda and the core values of the IMI:
–
Focus on science
–
Focus on patients
–
Lean and agile
Building a strong value
proposition for the community
20
Agenda

Background on The Innovative Medicines Initiative

Challenges

Key success factors

Lessons learned
21
Lessons Learned

Building trust through exchange of information and views

Focus on science drives consensus on objectives

The Association as «one-stop-shop» for industry
involvement

Results driven

Top executive buy-in
22
The ultimate beneficiaries ...
People living longer, healthier and
more prosperous lives in the EU
23